Subject Re: Work Items discussed during the REFEDs meeting
From Licia Florio <florio@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date Mon, 21 Jun 2010 10:24:20 +0200

Hi all,

Thanks to everybody for the very your useful comments on this topic.

Just to let you know Nicole and I are working to finalise all REFEDs
related documents. You should receive them in a few days!


> On 07.06.2010 14:21, Licia Florio wrote:
>> Could you please provide your comments to the proposed list of topics by
>> Friday at latest?
> Apologies for extending Friday...
>> a. Raising REFEDs profile
>> --------------------------
>> REFEDs flywheel, website, etc
>> b. Established points of contacts with dependable communications for all
>> major R&E federations and VOs
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> The main challenge will be to keep this list up-to-date (the current
>> REFEFs wiki has got already an extensive list, but mechanisms should be
>> defined to ensure that the data on wiki are kept up-to-date).
>> This is particular relevant for moving VOs related efforts forward.
>> These include discussions with VO leadership, specific plans for
>> rollouts and cutovers, and contacts with those federations whose
>> countries house major research groups.
> This is important, both for the higher eduation and research VOs and for
> the federations.
>> c. Working with publishers
>> -----------------------------
>> Andrew reported on the initial calls between a some of REFEDs
>> participants and publishers. Andrew noted that the publishers when
>> approached were very positive about the REFEDs. They felt that REFEDs is
>> the only forum where their needs can be discussed in an international
>> context.
>> As engaging with the publishers can result in discussing a variety of
>> issues, Andrew proposed that he would, in consultation with the
>> publishers, prepare a list of topics that would then be mapped to REFEDs
>> roadmap. Some of the issues identified cover licences, usability, and so
>> on.
> I would like to see this activity as a more general "domesticating
> applications for federations", but with the first deliverable centered
> on communicating and understanding publisher's needs for integration of
> federated information resources.
>> d. User Interface
>> ----------------------------
>> This includes rough consensus on common language for use in privacy
>> managers, work on harmonising user interfaces, consensus on common
>> language for use in privacy managers.
> Does this include the deep linking issues, or do they fall under e) ?
> How do we relate to on-going work like UMA?
>> e. Discovery
>> -------------
>> Decide on a specific plan for eduId (note that eduID is just a temporary
>> name, no agreement on the name has been reached) and foster the
>> deployment. The discovery problem is being worked on in many different
>> arenas within the Internet identity community, including ULX, OpenId,
>> Infocard, etc.
>> The liaison with the publishers could be beneficial for this.
> There is strong overlap with d, since user interface is the key to good
> discovery.
>> g. Attributes
>> ---------------
>> Semantic of eduPerson: based on the discussion followed after Mikael's
>> talk use-cases need to be collected and discussed.
> We are all using eduPerson, and then some stuff.  If there is to be work
> on semantic interoperability, we need first to state some ground rules
> for federations for higher education and research:
>  - use the eduPerson schema
>  - quite a few federations use Schac in addition
>  - most federations add other schema (in our case: eduOrg, eduOrgUnit,
> norEduPerson, norEduOrg)
>  - semantic interoperability today is provided as Best Effort, no
> guarantees for the same definition
>  - federations MUST publish their guidelines for attributes
> When that is done, the discussion may start about the content, but let
> us not forget in the REFEDS context to show the shared framework (and be
> grateful to the guys who whipped up eduPerson for us all to enjoy and
> share ;)
>> e. Looking at ways to exchange verified metadata
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> Create a WG to define a short-term approach to providing metadata for
>> shared community resources (e.g. the Refeds wiki, the spaces wiki, the
>> Czech medical atlas, etc)
>> eduGAIN is not the answer to everything, other solutions should be
>> looked at. Several options are already available; the output of this
>> work item should be the reach consensus on which solution(s) to use.
> Reach consensus or understanding mechanisms as the first step?
>> f. LoA
>> --------
>> - waiting for the results coming from JISC study on deployability of
>> both InCommon Silver and Kantara;
>> - next steps for federations to start deploying higher LoA
> Ingrid

Licia Florio
TERENA Project Development Officer

TERENA Secretariat
Singel 468 D, 1017 AW Amsterdam
The Netherlands
T: +31 20 530 44 88

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature