Refeds


Subject Re: VO challenges - article
From Nicole Harris <nicole.harris@xxxxxxxxx>
Date Wed, 28 Oct 2015 19:43:08 +0000

We are working on some campaigns for the end of December and January. 
Some of you will have seen some early
materials:https://wiki.refeds.org/download/attachments/6619142/Resolutions.pdf
and https://wiki.refeds.org/download/attachments/6619142/REFEDS.pdf. 
They are not finished and just draft ideas at the moment so please don't
use yet and the supporting web information isn't in place, but will be
by EWTI. I am also planning something similar for R&S for federations to
use as they see fit.  Feedback welcomed

We are also reaching out to promote the importance of R&S higher up the
NREN managerial food-chain.  I like the idea of reaching out to Educause
and AACRAO.

No magic bullets but chipping away...

On 27/10/2015 18:10, Nick Roy wrote:
> I like the idea of arming researchers with a white paper (see Mikael's note a few back that has a link to a letter in support of CoCo sent to EU university CIOs - https://wiki.edugain.org/CoCoEndorsement
>
>
>
> However, various permutations on this kind of researcher-focused, targeted approach have been tried before.  When successful, it results in a few targeted research universities joining the very small club of R&S supporters.  It doesn't get at the larger issue, which is that LIGO or the NIH or CERN or any of a number of other research efforts have collaborators at places we as federation operators and IAM practitioners have no idea about, and no way of targeting.
>
> The larger solution to the issue, I think, involves a massive communication campaign aimed at CIOs and Registrars on the level of EDUCAUSE (for US CIOs) and AACRAO (for US Registrars) - similarly broad venues in the EU, Asia/Pacific, etc, if they are available.  Then, coupling that with incentives at a federation level.  Maybe you get a discount on your participation fees if you support R&S (that might work for InCommon, probably very different support/incentive model in other feds).
>
> Nick
>
> On 10/27/15, 11:44 AM, "Jones, Mark B" <Mark.B.Jones@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>>> [Mark] I don't think 'perceived risk' is the issue here.  There are no
>>>> users here asking for this and so it is not on anyone's to-do list.  I
>>>> think it would be an easy sell if it were a priority for someone not in
>> IT.
>>> In my experience, most researchers in research VOs don't know what
>> federated
>>> identity is or what it would buy them, so it's not surprising that they're
>> not
>>> asking. If the VO has a computing person (or, fates forbid, a computing
>> group),
>>> someone in the VO might know about identity federation and  want to enable
>> it
>>> for their collaboration. Would having someone from NIH contact you and say
>>> "can you support R&S entity category for us so we can enable research for
>>> people on your campus" be enough to get it done? Because, if so, I might
>> be
>>> able to arrange that.
>>>
>> [Mark] I believe that having the right researcher ask would get the job done
>> here.
>>
>>
>>> In any case, I can assure you from personal experience that it is not the
>> case
>>> that all IdP operators simply need to be asked and will then start
>> supporting
>>> research VOs, even with R&S attributes. There are some large research
>>> campuses that we (LIGO) have been asking on many levels, including having
>> on-
>>> campus researchers ask on our behalf, and still have not gotten R&S
>> support.
>>> The reasoning we're given supports Nick's assertions - there is a
>> perceived risk
>>> that someone somewhere on campus can't sign off on. Whether that is the
>> only
>>> or most pressing reason it is not done I can't know.
>>>
>>> Warren
>>>
>> [Mark] I think Nick's FERPA argument is persuasive.  Maybe a combination of
>> asking and arming the researchers with a prepared white paper that addresses
>> commonly perceived risks?

-- 
Nicole Harris
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
GÉANT - Amsterdam Office
M: +31 (0) 646105395
Skype: harrisnv

Networks • Services • People 

Learn more at www.geant.org​