at 16:00 CET
| Time | Item |
|---|---|
| 5 min | Review previous meeting, open actions |
| 5 min | Common meeting time for future meetings |
| 15 min | Next steps, timeline |
| 15 min | AOB |
For minutes of the previous meeting, please see: 2020-01-21 Baseline Expectations Meeting
For the action log, please see: Meeting notes
Anass kindly set up an European centric Evento-page to help the WG to find a placeholder for future meetings: https://evento.renater.fr/survey/edugain-baseline-maturity-call-bb58ksld
Ideally we end up with 2 meeting slots. Tuesday 3pm CET is currently the most popular time slot.
brief discussion about what the group hope to achieve/deliver. we have a T&i town hall on 24th-25th March
in Stockholm and hope to have some high level objectives etc to be ready for then. this timescale is tight so weekly meetings
to start with. discussion about meeting slot and world timezones. was suggested that it was very important to
have slot suitable for InCommon because of their experience.
agreed time for meeting slot : 15.00 CET tuesday
Alan asked if participants were familiar with the InCommon baseline expectations work (using the hands-up action in zoom.us ) - 50/50 so decided it would be good to have an overview
given by InCommon....and fortunately several InCommon people present :-)
Tom Barton gave a summary overview of the InCommon baseline work. 2 or 3 phases. need to get agreement for the need for the baseline. High level overview statements
what of the high level stuff could be accomplished?
metadata elements - easiest, of value etc . needed something to generate processes to adhere and achieve a baseline. all the people to contact, resolution of statements,
holding people to account. processes for dispute resolution - 12000 hours of effort to get records updated for contact details etc.
service desk, for registration authorities and CTAB outreach.
'lagging organisations' to become compliant
do we want to adopt InCommon levels by default or adapt 'REFED-ian' versions.
how do you check the compliance? automated tools may not work. so process for challenge if details not right (eg is the IdP operated at Organisation level authority)
The management platform. Incommon federation manager updated to ensure it aligned with requirements (e.g. can no longer enter old/obsolete things) discussion then followed:
Eskil Swahn - baseline expectations for IdP are fairly hands on and okay . for SPs might need some fine tunings - EU has different legislation in place that needs to be looked at.
Different architectures may be of concern - eg hub and spoke versus mesh - Miroslav Milinović "some work may be easier. self-assessment...audit process..random sampling."
some of the member of federation contracts were updated to take in the baseline rules - eg for the IdP to be trusted and used by the organisation.
how much formalisation is required here?
Objectives:
InCommon's baseline: https://www.incommon.org/federation/baseline-expectations-for-trust-in-federation/
And this is the consensus process developed along side Baseline Expectations: https://www.incommon.org/federation/community-consensus/
The dispute resolution process: https://www.incommon.org/federation/dispute-resolution/
Do they cover what we try to accomplish with this WG?
Objectives for T&I Town Hall:
Homework for the next session - look at the InCommon Baseline expectations and see whether federations will have issues or can implement the baseline