Assurance

["Jones, Mark B" <>]

Not sure how it defeats the purpose.  My thought was that if the objection 
was dealing with a for profit corporation then a non-profit that is in the 
IaaS business might need to be encouraged.  So my suggestion would be that 
InCommon (or some other non-profit entity) could establish direct 
relationships with people and provide life time credentials just like Google.

I think you are correct about "barriers to entry".  But I think those 
barriers are needed to ensure interoperability and trust.

-----Original Message-----
From: 

 
[mailto:]
 On Behalf Of Cantor, Scott
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 1:56 PM
To: 

Subject: Re: [Assurance] Assurance Biz Case: Update on DoEd

On 10/31/12 2:49 PM, "Jones, Mark B" 
<>
 wrote:

>InCommon could get into the social identity game...

That defeats the purpose, it's not "bringing your own identity".

Also, one of the byproducts of NIST's notions on assurance is that it limits 
the playing field and creates barriers to entry for other players to get 
involved.

-- Scott