These are draft minutes and have not yet been approved.
- Roll Call — Quorum is 4/7.
- Reminder of Motion of Minutes Approval: 3 Feb 2011
Bob Morgan moves to pass the minutes as recorded.
Hank Mauldin seconds. No discussion or objections. Motion carries
- ACTION ITEM REVIEW:ACTION ITEM 20110203-01 Bob Morgan---will take a first stab at evangelizing the white paper on Interoperable meta-data for federations. Due to Bob's vacation, no progress has been made.
2. TFW Meta Model
How did this project come about?
- In doing a gap analysis of other TFWs, Rainer discovered the difficulty with all their differences. So he decided to map an "architecture". He began a database and engaged in conversations with P3, IAWG, ABA to address scope and terminology.
What will it include:
- Structure defining a meta model
- Tool for conducting gap analysis
- Resources are needed as completion of this work will take a few months of effort on multiple shoulders.
- Should the IAWG's charter be re-scoped or the IAF expanded?
- IAWG consensus: The WG prefers to remain focussed on Id Assurance, but will continue to house this effort.
- John and Joni have taken this conversation to the LC for a review of just where this project and it's scope should / could land.
- LC's Draft Proposal:
- Option 1: LC TFW Coordination Subcommittee, comprised of converging WG and DG leads. It would provide alignment and highlight convergence as well as divergence. This would additionally allow Kantara to address the community with it's findings and progress, thus collaborating with outside tangential organizations.
- Option 2: Forming a cross-organizational WG specifically focussed on formulating the TFW MM and informing ITU-T efforts. This WG would be the home of the TFW MM---sponsored by liaising organizations like OIX, ABA, Kantara (etc.) representatives as these efforts would be developing collateral relevent to others outside of just Kantara.
- With these considerations, should even the RP guidance work remain with the IAWG? The FIWG further discussed RP concepts and authentication around the User Community as they inherently impact data handling. Commercial entities vs. non commercial entities are at the root of this argument.
- A Kantara goal would be to develop a 3rd party certification process.
- Various theories arise at how RP guidance / 3rd party assertions could be drafted — the education community has been doing work in this arena.
- Higher education federation sector discussions: the problems with managing attribute release and how we might explore offloading policy control to metadata-based information about SP behavior.
(see threads on barriers for SPs, and "simplifying attribute release")