Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Table of Contents

Participants

Panel
titleProposers


NameOrganisation
Lukas HämmerleSWITCH


...

Panel
titleGN4-3 project team


#Enter the persons who are participating in the team that works on this Activity - delete this line after using the template#

NameOrganisationRole
LRZScrum Master
Héder MihályKIFUTechnical Lead
Robertas Visockis
Developer
GÉANTDeveloper



#Enter the persons who are internal projects or external stakeholders of this Activity - delete this line after using the template#
Panel
titleStakeholders


Name

Organisation

Role 
Davide VaghettiGARReduGAIN service owner
PSNCeduGAIN OPS
multipleThomas BaereckevariousSwitcheduTEAMS support team
Nicole HarrisREFEDsREFEDs representative
Michelle WilliamsGEANTInAcademia service owner
SUnetInhouse statistics nerd



Panel
titleStakeholder engagements


DateName(s)OrganisationNotes
25.11.19

Initial stakeholder kick-off
03.12.19

Lukas Hämmerle

Thomas Baerecke

SWITCH

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qy-p6mCPxY951FphfhvioStMEDM9fRjZktpBC2Q5fBc/edit
04.12.19

Tomasz Wolniewicz

Davide Vaghetti

UMK

GARR

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GYYMmnEKfJPOSPv-vv3e9LVDjmebLJTUDeMDDqbvLIc/edit
17.12.19--Sprint Demo 2.1
14.02.20Nicole HarrisGÉANThttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1E_P_tes4XuWn8ohXH1QRkSdx0Uy2blwEVZ2EiyRHaew/edit
19.03.20--Sprint Demo 2.3


Activity overview

Panel
titleDescription

There are currently already several eduGAIN checking tools that examine the quality of an eduGAIN federation’s metadata, the connection status of their IdPs or the attribute release status of their IdPs. The results of these checks are public but only few federation operators seem to regularly consult the results. 
The eduGAIN Support team plays a pivotal role in trying to make federation operators and sometimes also entities aware of some of these issues, but as this is done manually and it is tedious work, they typically only act in case of complaints (e.g. UK/InCommon metadata import filters rejecting entities), which means not not all entities are engaged with and it is done so only irregularly.

It would be an improvement if all federation operators would receive a monthly email summarizing the state of their federation.  Therefor this activity proposes to create a tool that aggregates the combined result of all these checks into 1 comprehensive infographic per entity. This infographic should also show how well the entity is doing in relation to its peers. At the same time it should provide pointers to documentation on how to actually improve. A second infographic will generate an overview for federation operators, summarizing the per entity findings. This page should also compare their own federation with their peers.
The tool will put this information readily into the hands of the federation operators allowing them to decide if and how to pass it on towards the entities in their federation.

In addition, there is work ongoing to check for status of various entity categories, like CoCo, R&S and SIRTFI. This is currently happening in separate teams. Rather then reinvent the wheel and create yet another tool, we should investigate joining efforts.

Example infographic (not on entity status, but just for example: https://www.surf.nl/files/2019-03/gebruik_surfconext_2018.pdf)

...

Panel
titleActivity goals
  • Collect the well know issues that need checking an reporting on w/ Lukas and members of eduGAIN support team and fedOPS generically
  • Collect the various information sources (existing checking tools)  we have for creating these informational pages
  • Design a layout for the two infographics
  • Create a tool (and possible required backed checks)  to produce the infographic (Note
  • enable Enable periodic emailing of infographics to fedOPS

Activity Details

Panel
titleTechnical details
  • We may need to add some new checks
  • we We should discuss if such tools can be closely integrated with the existing eduGAIN technical pages
  • We should engage with the eduGAIN support team to establish if they want additional checking and notification to take place
  • We we should collaborate with e.g. the team working on SIRTFI/CoCo checking
  • we We should engage with some people from e.g. marcoms to help us work on the layout and presentation of the infographics
  • We should discuss this with the baseline expectation work in REFEDs

...

Panel
titleBusiness case
  • Overall this would increase the awareness of which issues a federation has, it would increase the motivation to fix them and it thus would increase the overall eduGAIN service quality.
  • By automating some of these task, we relieve the burden of the eduGAIN support team
  • Also, federation operators would become aware of some of the existing eduGAIN checking tools, which would be beneficial also for their local federation


Panel
titleRisks
  • Check tools too difficult to integrate with
  • FedOps would still not act/care

...

Panel
titleSustainability
This tooling should be delivered in close proximity of the existing tools. For this we will discuss with current eduGAIN OPS. The tool may also be used to support the baseline expectations work in eduGAIN/REFEDs

Activity Results

Panel
titleResults

The activity was successfully completed after a total of two iterations. A prototype was developed that meets the expectations of the stakeholders. The tool, in future called "eduGAIN Reporting", was handed over to the eduGAIN Task. In order to develop this further, an eduGAIN reporting development team was founded. The created prototype is used for additional tests with the users and replaced by a productive system a few months later. The following resources were produced and delivered:

#Please provide pointers to completed and intermediary results of this activity - delete this line after using the template#

Meetings

Date

Activity

Owner

Minutes

January 1June 23, 20172020

Kickoff meeting



Every ThursdayWeekly meetings

March 23, 2021eduGAIN hand-over

Documents

Attachments