Interfederation

[Tom Scavo <>]

On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Scott Koranda 
<>
 wrote:
>
> InCommon joining eduGAIN is only useful to LIGO at the point that
> international IdPs release a persistent identifier to all of our SPs
> published in InCommon without LIGO having to take any extra steps.

I believe you're conflating attribute release with technical trust. It
doesn't really matter from where you obtain your partner metadata, you
still have a separate attribute release issue.

The best solution we have to that problem at the moment is R&S. Are
you aware that REFEDs has proposed an R&S spec with international
scope? As soon as that spec is finalized, we (InCommon) will support
it, and then of course it's up to IdPs in the UKf to jump on the band
wagon.

> I am not confident that happens immediately upon InCommon becoming an
> eduGAIN participant.

Nor upon consuming UKf metadata either, as I believe you discovered
during your interop with Cardiff.

> I see the InCommon and UK interfederation as another vehicle for
> pursuing interfederation and exploring the space--a vehicle that will
> be much more flexible and nimble.

Again, unless I'm missing something, I think eduGAIN is the way to go here.

> If I am wrong and InCommon joining eduGAIN is quick and leads quickly
> to what we need that is great.

It won't streamline attribute release (but then nothing---except
perhaps R&S---will do that). eduGAIN is, however, the easiest way for
us to get Cardiff metadata into your hands (and your metadata into
theirs).

> I simply do not want to put all my eggs in that basket

May I ask why?

> and would like to continue to build on the work Steven,
> Ian, and LIGO have done.

No offense, but that's not the totality of interfederation, not even
close. The hard work of interfederation are the out-of-band agreements
that assure relying parties that what they are consuming meets their
requirements (whatever they happen to be).

Tom