Interfederation

["Caskey, Paul" <>]

I'm late to this thread, but I agree with you.

In fact, I had the same concern and had typed up an email on it, but then 
noticed the 'domestic interfed' text.

But, I agree that we should clearly indicate this is a primary focus.  And I 
like the suggested change.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> 
>  [
> ]
>  On Behalf Of Ann West
> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 10:21 AM
> To: 
> 
> Subject: Re: [inc-interfed] Kicking off Phase 2 of Interfed
> 
> Warren,
> 
> My main point here is to include a reference to the regional R&E network
> provider work in the Charter to make it explicit that their use cases will 
> be
> considered by the group. Given most are not used to working in the InC/MW
> space, making sure we mention them will help encourage their participation,
> an important thing if they will be providing a substantial number of our
> domestic use cases. These folks vary widely in their identity expertise and
> knowledge, so a subcommittee sounds like a good approach here.
> 
> Here's a suggested tweak:
> 
> e. Establish practices and policies for domestic interfederation.
> Subcommittee: Identify use cases, such as those from the regional R&E
> network providers. Pilot projects.
> 
> Mark S or Paul, anything to add?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Ann
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/24/13 10:47 AM, "Warren Anderson" 
> <>
> wrote:
> 
> >Hi Ann,
> >
> >Sorry if I'm being naive - I'm new to the group. I would have thought
> >that regional federations were use cases for proposed charter item 1.e:
> >
> >e. Establish practices and policies for domestic interfederation.
> >Subcommittee: Identify use cases. Pilot projects.
> >
> >It seems to me that regional federations are great use cases for
> >domestic federation, and that it would be great if someone wanted to
> >initiate a pilot project for one (or more) of them.
> >
> >Again, sorry if I'm missing the point - just trying to get up to speed.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Warren
> >
> >On Sep 24, 2013, at 16:26 , Ann West 
> ><>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> At one point, we had a reference to the Regionals providing one or
> >> more use cases for interfed. It seems that this has dropped out with
> >> the text now written to favor international use cases.
> >>
> >> I would advocate that we do include domestic examples, if only to
> >> ensure what we're doing with our international colleagues still maps
> >> well nationally.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9/23/13 11:41 AM, "Steven Carmody" 
> >> <>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Last week Jim Basney, Warren Anderson (LIGO, Leader of the next
> >>>phase),  and I had a conference call (Paul Caskey was unavailable due
> >>>to travel;  Paul has agreed to serve as the TAC Liaison for Phase
> >>>Two). We provided  some background and context for Warren, we
> >>>reviewed the deliverables  from Phase One (led by Jim), and we
> >>>reviewed the DRAFT Charter for Phase  Two. We're now poised to
> >>>startup Phase Two.
> >>>
> >>> The first step is to ensure that we're comfortable with the DRAFT
> >>> Charter, available here:
> >>>
> >>> https://spaces.internet2.edu/display/inctac/Interfed+Subcommittee
> >>>
> >>> The deliverables from Phase One can be reviewed here:
> >>>
> >>> https://spaces.internet2.edu/x/DAMlAg
> >>>
> >>> Please use email to suggest changes (additions and deletions) tot he
> >>> DRAFT. I'd like to close this discussion by next monday, and then
> >>> move the new Charter forward.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >+================[ WARREN G. ANDERSON
> ]====================+
> >| PO Box 413, Dept. of Physics, Milwaukee, WI 53201, USA   |
> >|   CANADA: (403) 617 6720          USA: (414) 212 5446    |
> >+========================================================
> ==+
> >
> >