Metadata Distribution Subcommittee of TAC

[Tom Scavo <>]

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Cantor, Scott 
<>
 wrote:
> On 12/15/14, 11:25 PM, "Tom Scavo" 
> <>
>  wrote:
>>
>>Does that make sense?
>
> Sure, I understand the reasoning. Like with anything else, it's just a
> matter of managing expectations, so if we're clear that we want to do it,
> and give people a chance to adjust I think it's fine.

That's encouraging. Thanks for being flexible.

> My only real concern is the "open endedness" of it.

Well, since the basic idea is to create the infrastructure to import
and filter metadata, we could put a limit on the time the "foreign"
metadata sits in the preview aggregate, just long enough for Ops to
develop the infrastructure and a few testers to verify that they can
actually consume the metadata without problem. Then, regardless of the
progress of the legal and policy groups, we just pull out the
"foreign" metadata after a fixed time period and say, "hey, we know we
can do it technically, now the ball is in your court!"

Let me put a stake in the ground: What if we left the eduGAIN entity
descriptors in the preview aggregate for, say, 30 days?

> I'd rather have a focused group put together a plan for moving it forward
> and not wait for everybody out there to suddenly get religion and be ok
> that this is going to happen. I don't think we can overcome the intertia
> if we wait for that.

Well, your fear is already a reality, I'm afraid (you've probably been
too busy with the Shib IdP to notice :) but fortunately we already
have tentative buy-in from key people, you were pretty much the last
key person to approve ;-)

If anybody else has an opinion about this plan one way or the other,
please weigh in now!

One requirement that I've heard is that we should put an XML comment
in the preview aggregate that says something about the intended use of
the aggregate. How do folks feel about that?

Tom