1 / 17

COmanage and InCommon: Present and Future Activities and Interactions

COmanage and InCommon: Present and Future Activities and Interactions. Heather Flanagan, COmanage Project Coordinator, Internet2. Presentation Outline. Intro: COmanage and InCommon Body: VO use cases and challenges Conclusion: Outreach and expectations. What is COmanage?.

july
Download Presentation

COmanage and InCommon: Present and Future Activities and Interactions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. COmanage and InCommon: Present and Future Activities and Interactions Heather Flanagan, COmanage Project Coordinator, Internet2

  2. Presentation Outline • Intro: COmanage and InCommon • Body: VO use cases and challenges • Conclusion: Outreach and expectations

  3. What is COmanage? • Collaboration management platform (CMP) • Been through several iterations • Funded by the National Science Foundation and Internet2

  4. COmanage • Current status • Focus on COmanage Registry • Pieces (API, some code) is already in use at LIGO • Exploring potential for a service instance • Enrollment and attribute intake is a hot area of discussion • Demo instance up and running at I2 http://www.internet2.edu/comanage/

  5. InCommon • The U.S. research and education federation • Interesting activities: • IAM Online • Certificate Service (including personal) • Policies, best practices, guidelines http://www.incommonfederation.org

  6. InCommon • Bronze, Silver, and beyond • Internationalizing the levels • LoA should not be dependent on geopolitical boundaries • uApprove • Required attributes? • Nice-to-have attributes? • Default attribute release? • If federations don’t coordinate what is released, interfederation will fail

  7. Challenges to our VO • The attribute problem – what’s automatically available? • Enter in: InCommon and other federations • Social identity and LoA • Different VO want to treat people differently based on how they are authenticating, and yet, technically the LoA is not different (LoA 1) • How does InCommon bronze/silver enter in to this?

  8. Cont’d • Domesticating applications • “the nice thing about standards…” • Broader VO issues around who can license software for the VO • Need more than just web-based tools https://wiki.surfnetlabs.nl/display/domestication/Overview

  9. One more… • CMP across federations • Should federation be a requirement? • Does a CMP have to be an IdP? • What metadata needs to be shared between CMP? • CO versus COU

  10. VO use cases • LIGO • Large VO with collaborators and partner VO around the world • Goal is hard science, focused on results from a set of large instruments • A poster child for challenging identity management • Already seeing improvements in collaboration and research interaction thanks to tools that know who they are without them having to ask

  11. VO use cases, cont’d • iPlant Collaborative • Large VO with collaborators around the world • Focus are several “Grand Challenges” around plant biology, with a continuing theme of community outreach • Expect thousands of participants, but how they are authenticated and registered in the system dictate what data they can see and use • Domesticated app, especially storage, is a Big Deal

  12. Role of the Federation • Can the federation assist with the licensing problem? • Can the federation mandate attribute release policies? • Is the CMP a good service offering for federations to provide to their constituency?

  13. Things we have learned • Domesticated technologies are good • But researchers are still learning about them • Federations are good • But researchers are still learning about them • CMP are good • But researchers are still learning about them • Researchers don’t want to talk to central IT, which would shorten the learning process considerably

  14. How to reach out to research? • Start with a single research group, work with them closely • Researchers will gossip in their field, and fields overlap • Don’t surprise central IT • Keep getting the word out to central IT players; they will know what to do when Dr. Brilliant demands a CMP for his VO by tea time

  15. Making a difference to Science • “Harvesting the science content from LIGO data is a collaborative effort between instrumentalists, data analysts, modelers, and theorists. Efficient collaboration begins with scalable and robust identity management infrastructure that can easily be leveraged and integrated with the wide spectrum of tools LIGO scientists use to collaborate and analyze the LIGO data. Middleware from Internet2, including Shibboleth and Grouper, is enabling more LIGO science through easier collaboration and access to resources.” – Scott Koranda, Senior Scientist, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee; Lead Architect, LIGO Identity Management effort

  16. Conclusion • Expect more in this space • More CMP • More activity in the federation world • More app developers expecting someone else to deal with their authentication, group, and authorization needs

More Related