InC Research Participants

[Tom Scavo <>]

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 5:20 PM, Cantor, Scott 
<>
 wrote:
> On 11/7/16 5:14 PM, Tom Scavo wrote:
>>
>> All R&S IdPs registered by InCommon:
>> Number of IdPs with a good errorURL: 29
>> Number of IdPs with a bad errorURL: 27
>> Number of IdPs with no errorURL: 74
>> Total number of IdPs: 130
>
> Given that we have wide latitude in how the IdP tagging there works, is
> it possible to discuss tightening that up to require one, and a 200
> status back from it, to apply the tag?

How would that work for the existing 130 R&S IdPs registered by InCommon?

I'm going to sidestep your question for the moment and outline what I *can* 
do:

1. Add the errorURL to the TODO list for prospective R&S IdPs [1]
2. Publish a list of actual errorURLs in IdP metadata
3. Send a note to inc-ops-notifications and ask IdP operators to add
(or update) their errorURL in metadata

I'm hoping this will increase the quantity and quality of errorURLs in
metadata without too much work on our part. Does that sound reasonable
for starters?

Tom

[1] Research and Scholarship for IdPs https://spaces.internet2.edu/x/aAbvAQ