Assurance

["William G. Thompson, Jr." <>]

On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Cantor, Scott <> wrote:

On 8/10/12 10:10 AM, "William G. Thompson, Jr." <> wrote:
>
>This is somewhat of a (related?) problem for Unicon as well.  Unicon is
>both an InC Affiliate and Participant.  Unicon's IdP is sufficient to
>login to Internet2 wiki via InC metadata, but not much else.   Given we
>most often work with HE, we are constantly
> exercising various systems/forms/procedures for guest access.  If only
>there was some federated authentication technology we could use... :)

There's virtually nothing out there that would require you to meet any
assurance level at all to be used as an IdP in InCommon, as this is all
very much future work. So I'm not sure what it is you can't leverage that
IdP for that, say, OSU could.

As an example, I just checked and the wiki I operate certainly accepts it.
Not that you'd care, but my point is that if an SP isn't accepting your
assertions, that's the SP's decision.

I do appreciate your perspective, and I realize this expanded vision of commercial partner participation is only somewhat related to some SP accepting Unicon's IdP assertions.

I guess what I was trying to hint at is that accepting commercial partners in the IAP would signal a more equal footing in the federation and perhaps pave the way for more streamlined access.  We mostly get access to campus VPNs, Window/Linux Hosts, and internal wikis.  If at some point in the future these systems require bronze/silver/etc we'd be left out in the cold so to speak.  (perhaps rightly so :)

Best,

Bill

 

-- Scott