Transcript pptx - Common Solutions Group

TIER – before, now and after
If you do not talk this will be a very
long hour because we can only
repeat the same stuff for so long…
1
We are… I am …
• Internet 2 wholly owned subsidiary
also known as discarded entity
• Internet 2 Board member
• InCommon Federation
• InCommon Steering Committee (Chair)
2
Internet 2
• “Internet2 is an exceptional community of U.S.
and international leaders in research,
academia, industry and government who
create and collaborate via innovative
technologies.”
• We all are Internet 2
3
InCommon
• InCommon is trust framework for U.S. education
and research
– Best practices/policies
• Federation support (best practices)
• Assurance (Shared practices - Bronze and beyond)
– Mature consumable services
• Certificates (Comodo)
• MFA (Duo, SafeNet)
– Community of participants
• What in Common is NOT
– Grouper, Shibboleth, MACE, COmanage …. and other
Internet 2 efforts
– CIFER … and other Kuali/Rice efforts
• We all are InCommon
4
InCommon SC
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Klara Jelinkova, University of Chicago
Jack Suess, University of Maryland, Baltimore County
Joel Cooper, Swarthmore College
Mark Crase, California State University System
Dennis Cromwell, Indiana University
Michael Gettes, Carnegie Mellon University
Chris Holmes, Baylor University
Susan Kelley, Yale University
Ken Klingenstein, Internet2 (ex officio)
John O'Keefe, Lafayette College
Dave Vernon, Cornell University
Melissa Woo, University of Oregon
Bill Yock, University of Washington
5
InCommon Steering
• Program Subcommittee
– work closely with the TAC and the AAC to set up InCommon’s
program priorities with measurable objectives
– approved by the full Steering Committee in the first quarter of
each year and forwarded to Internet 2 via the Steering
Committee chair.
• External Relations and Governance Subcommittee (ER&GS)
- Draft Charter:
– Assure that SC and InCommon activities (relationships) are
consistent with its Charter and reflective of priorities expressed
by InCommon Participants. Interfaces with the Member
(Internet 2).
– Oversees the nominations process and reviews InCommon
Charter and SC ByLaws regularly suggesting updates to the full
SC.
– Works closely with the Member on organizational changes
impacting InCommon (the TIER thing falls into here)
6
InCommon next steps
• New clearer charter: InCommon is a wholly owned
subsidiary of Internet 2
• New clearer bylaws: Internet 2 runs InCommon;
InCommon Steering is a Board that advises Internet 2
(just like our own BOTs do)
• Better/streamlined processes for day-to-day
operations: Internet 2 staff needs to run InCommon
and get community feedback
• Priority setting and communication: InCommon
Steering program committee helps set priorities and
advise on future plans
• Work with Internet 2/InCommon staff to fulfill FY14
priorities and set FY15 priorities
7
InCommon Priorities 2014: Advance Objective 2 Increasing the Value of InCommon Participation
•
•
•
•
•
Enhance access to a robust network of human resources
– Develop strategy to expand affiliates program
Shape and influence Net+ service development with respect to identity
– Guide pipeline of service opportunities based on membership input and feedback
Develop more mature, scalable, and resilient operations
– Review and update DR policies and procedures
– Enhance service desk offerings
– Complete Internet2 ERP/CRM/Finance platform migration
– Deploy SHA2 metadata aggregates
– Expand InCommon Operations staff to appropriately resource strategic initiatives
Expand the portfolio of thirdparty services
– Launch eduRoam
– Launch Docusign
– Develop a tagging and certification program for Sponsored Partners
Expand the portfolio of inhouse services
– Establish a managed IdP, complete with self service account management, audit and reporting
capabilities
– Implement an IdP of Last Resort ○
– Pilot a Social2SAML Gateway service
– Establish executive dashboards, reports, and analytics
8
InCommon Goals 2014 (meaning - if
we have time…)
•
•
•
OBJECTIVE 1 Simplify the Process to Federate IdPs and SPs
– Create more tools to aid with deployment and management of federating
technology
• Develop new GUIbased configuration application
• Deploy new IdP Discovery Interface
OBJECTIVE 4 Innovate ¨Influence¨ and Lead Where it Matters
– Support and encourage community engagement, communication, and
collaboration
• Sponsor and support Identity Week, CAMP, and ACAMP activities
• Produce monthly IAM webinars and InCommon Affiliate webinars
– Clearly articulate and promulgate the mission and value of InCommon
• Develop and distribute more robust mission and value proposition materials
• Develop and implement an updated community engagement plan
• Launch an annual community survey
– Actively engage with and support local campus IAM
• Establish and support an IAM Directions affinity / CIFER Coordination group
OBJECTIVE 5 Put Trust and Privacy in to Identity
– Enhance the certificate service offering
• Complete deployment of InCommon IGTF Server CA for XSEDE
9
CSG Survey - What is TIER?
advisory/governance
group for Internet2
identity-related
activities
The middleware effort Version 3
The new Trust and Identity for Education
and Research portfolio for I2 Net +
TIER is an extension
of the trust
framework for Higher
Education
NFC
Google tells me it's a research group at
the University of California at Berkeley
10
CSG Survey - What TIER should be?
opportunity
to collaborate
on IAM
strategies and
platforms
Identify best practices for campus
IDM … help campuses deploy those
practices by providing open source
IDM software, and access to services
if the campus doesn't have the
resources to deploy and manage
that software
Look at IAM
needs and
prioritize
them
No sure
An extension of the trust framework
for Higher Education which includes
person registration, authentication
and authorization components
11
Trust and Identity in Education and
Research
TIER
Development and standards efforts
MACE
Shib
Grouper
Mature consumable
subscription services
InCommon
12
Core issues
• What services should be offered, at what cost
and support level?
• What software components should be
developed? What should be the investment
model?
• Who gets to say?
• Scope what is in/out?
• Who gets to prioritize?
13
TIER next steps
• Set a TIER charter (governance structure,
operating processes)
– InC: Jelinkova (Zoppi group), Cooper, Holmes,
Cromwell, Woo
– Kuali: Denna (Zoppi group), Trosvig
– Interested parties: Morooney, Futhey
– Internet 2: Waggener
• Figure out a funding model for the items
unfunded on operating lines (see InCommon
Futures Report)
14
Where do you want to go from here?
15