Re: [id-cloud] August 23 2010 meeting notes.doc

[Anil Saldhana <Anil.Saldhana@redhat.com>]

Membership Status Changes:
Voting Rights Gained:  Colis Walis (Govt.NZ),
Voting Rights Lost: Daniel Perry (Skyworth), John Dilley (Akamai)

Quorum: 17 of 24 (70%)  Achieved


On 08/23/2010 02:12 PM, Anil Saldhana wrote:
>  ========
> August 23 2010
>
> 1.Roll Call:   We have a Voting member Quorum.
> 2.In chat room at start:
>  Andy Kindred (Acxiom)
>  AnilSaldhana_RedHat
>  anonymous
>  Bill Becker (SafeNet)
>  Brian Marshall (Vanguard)
>  Dale Moberg
>  Dale Olds (Novell)
>  Darren Platt
>  David Kern (IBM)
>  John Bradley
>  Mark Robinton (HID)
>  Matt Rutkowski (IBM)
>  Palani Sakthi(IBM)1
>  Ricardo Koji Ushizaki (Serasa Experian)
>  Siddharth Bajaj (VeriSign/Symantec)
>  Tom Bishop (Conformity)
>  Tom Clifford
>  Travis Yoes
>
> 3.Note taker
> 4.Approve Minutes – August 9th meeting minutes approved.  Move Tom 
> Bishop, Second by Jerry
> 5.Discuss Use-Case Document.  IBM Matt Rutkowski.  Dicuss Version I of 
> use case document.
> a.Started with current OASIS Template
> b.Brought in all referenced terms and definitions.
> c.Brought in all use cases in raw form as submitted (Red Hat and others)
> d.Defined some things
> e.Has set of comments in columns
> f.Discussion around categories and individual categories
> i.Deference to OASIS terms and definitions.
> ii.ITU-T definitions not available
> iii.For reference OASIS needs external reference??? Anil says we 
> should include as much as we can in our document.  Any Legal Issues?  
> Must be resolved before our document goes public.
> 1.Check with Mary
> 2.Matt says must be a public version available
> iv.Section 2 of Draft: Infrastructure Trust Establishment
> 1.Establish Root Trust
> v.Infrastructure Identity Management (IM)
> vi.Federated Identity Management (FIM)
> 1.Multiple domains  Anil
> 2.We could create Federation as a Topic and add things under it 
> (subset of Section 2) that meet description under it.
> 3.Use cases may bear our use case gaps and patterns that exhibit 
> federation patterns.  Matt
> 4.Discussion on whether federation is a category or a subcategory.
> 5.All agree Federation to be categorized separately from SSO.
> 6.Pull out section 2.3 (Federated Identity Management)
> vii.Single Sign-On (SSO)
> 1.Single Domain.  Anil
> 2.Federation can apply to all of these categories (not sure who said 
> this)
> 3.
> viii.Account and Attribute Management
> 1.Someone can add a use case.  This is a heading and can encompass 
> either or both.
> 2.SAML use cases define different attributes
> 3.we can rechristen this whatever we want
> 4.This has been encapsulated under Identity Management – Pat?
> 5.Address self provisioning and account management - matt
> 6.high level term is Identity Management
> 7.We need to go a step lower – all of section 2 could be identity 
> management.  This is a labeling problem
> 8.Identity management within a single cloud and specialization for 
> management at a finer grain control level then a service provider is 
> accustomed to.  We are trying to get separation from infrastructure 
> identity management.  Someone said Add User then
> 9.Matt said this is why he added JIT account Provisioning.
> 10.table this for now.  User Management maybe?
> ix.Security Tokens
> 1.Can you give me a use case where it would not be in SSO?
> 2.Separate from SSO in patterns and interactions between tokens or 
> User Interactions across deployment boundaries
> 3.goes beyond single use of a token
> 4.Security Tokens and Assurance says Anil as category name.
> 5.Anil suggested this topic name due to Token Transformation and 
> levels of assurance in the cloud
> x.Audit & Compliance
>
> 6.Where do you see a need for addressing APIs in here?  Identity 
> Information…
> a.Thinks that there are APIs at all levels.
> b.APIs implied at each category
> c.Patrick – APIs fit across many categories.
> d.Confused at use of application in infrastructure management.
> i.Applications is the granular term for container
> e.What do we mean by infrastructure management.
> i.More like virtualization across multiple layers
> ii.Grey areas exist says Anil
> iii.If we want to take Use cases and fit them into categories or lay 
> out use cases in human terms and then describe process and list 
> applicable categories that overlap – Matt
> iv.Describer overall end process.  – Matt
> v.How to break down use cases???
> vi.Hoping for comments of specific subsections for each use case.
> 1.Roll definitions missing. - Matt
> 2.Good to say this use case represents these roles.
> 3.BP requires we define what goes in each section.
> f.Great start – Pat.
> 7.Face to Face in Washington Wed Sept 29th.
> a.Will provide teleconference facility
> b.If able to attend that would be good.
> c.M and T is the OASIS conference
> 8.Wiki has confirmed attendees.
> a.Add your name there
> b.All TC members should be able to update
> c.Brian was unable to update
> d.Anil and others will attend
> e.Will be a good event
> 9.Other Business from members?
> a.Dan Teriseni – will be at Face to Face and on a panel?
> i.All day on Wednesday
> b.You do not need to enroll in conference to attend meeting.
> c.Same registration place that you are attending face to face
> d.Register and it will be 0 if you only attend face to face meeting
> e.Need to make sure room is big enough
> f.Anil said the room is likely bigger then our TC
> 10.Any discussion on Glossary?
> a.We can have it as a separate document.  We can leave it all in one 
> for now
> b.Leave all terms and definitions in document for now.  Flag terms and 
> encourage use of terms and then we can decide whether to make  a 
> separate doc or not
> 11.Members  Please submit use cases as early as possible
> 12.Move to adjorn. Seconded.  No objections to Adjorn.
>
>
>
> =================================
>
> On 08/23/2010 01:54 PM, Brian Marshall wrote:
>> Meeting notes from August 23, 2010.
>>
>>
>> Enable yourself! Use Vanguard’s automated solutions to save time, 
>> improve the quality of your reporting and data, and ensure your 
>> security. Find out more at www.go2vanguard.com
>>
>> This e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of 
>> the addressee and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and 
>> CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, 
>> you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this e-mail or any 
>> attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail 
>> in error, please do not read this email, please delete all copies of 
>> this e-mail and any attachments and notify the sender immediately.  
>> Thank you.
>>