You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 3 Next »

V/C info

Dec 3, 2020 – 20:00 UTC / 21:CET/ 12:00 noon Pacific Time (US and Canada)

Pre-reading

DRAFT Agenda

Proposed work structure - Focus on the issues of R&S 1.3 in the following order, with each agenda coming to the next on the list

  1. eduPersonAffiliation vs eduPersonScopedAffiliation
    1. "and where affiliation is defined to be the eduPersonScopedAffiliation attribute." - How can we make the spec clearer?
  2. Identifier issue

    1. One of the reasons R&S is that it was targeting applications that were broken because they only allow for a single identifier to identify an individual (the “one field for everything” approach). That’s why ePPN was the chosen identifier, because it was traditionally a user-friendly identifier and so suitable for the one-size-fits-all use case, as long as you ignore reassignment. ePTID was added to address reassignment. Those applications failed miserably if they only had ePTID.

      Is this still an issue? Do we still need to support the one-size-fits-all approach? If we can chose a common, opaque identifier, with an understanding that you want the additional personalization, we can do that.

      • One opinion: time is right to do this, and R&S is the right place to do this first.
      • Second opinion: this is a question for the SP. Are they ready for R&S to move to a more opaque identifier? There’s no incentive for an IdP to make their identifier better unless there’s a demand by the SPs.
        • Based on the responses from the SPOG list, SPs do not handle identifier reassignment in any standardized manner. The level of automation in responding to this seems to depend entirely on the size of the SP and how big their IT budget is.
  3. Privacy Statements
    1. Should R&S require privacy statements?
  4. eduPersonASsurance
    1. Should R&S encourage the release of eduPersonAssurance as a "SHOULD" value, in support of REFEDS Assurance Framework
  5. Administrative involvement

    1. How to be clearer about “Without administrative involvement"

    2. How to be clearer that the campus does have control regarding what population they should release information about (e.g., whole campus? other?)

  6. R&S as it relates to CoCo
  • No labels