Attendees

Valter Nordh, VN (Chair)

Rob Evans, RE (JISC)

David Groep, DG (Nikhef)

Peter Schober, PSc (ACONET)

Yannis Mitsos, YM (GRNET)

Vicente Goyanes, VG (University of Vigo)

 

For GÉANT:

Valentino Cavalli VC

Alessandra Scicchitano AS

Nicole Harris NH

Licia Florio LF

Michael Enrico ME

Peter Szegedi PSz

John Dyer JD

 

1. Wecome agenda bashing and Approval of last meeting minutes - Valter

Valter welcomed the participants.

A review of the actions  of the previous meeting followed. The updated list of actions is shown below.

Ref.

Status

Who

Action

Comment

20140219-6

CLOSED

TTC

Re-consider a joined task force meeting in 2016

To be revisited if needed later on

20141105-01

OPEN

 

JD

PDOs

Improve TFs’ communication by using (TERENA) social media channels in a coordinated way

 

a) a strategy to reach the unknowns

(Comms staff - JD to share some ideas during the next TTC);

b) a way to make the outcome of the community work easy to read for everybody.

Each PDO is encouraged to share the main results of the TFs via social medias.

 

20150210-1

 

CLOSED

AS

1. AS to convey the comments of the TTC to the ISM SIG Steering Committee

2. TTC to continue this discussion online

The SIG is now an open group as per TTC recommendation.

20150210-2

OPEN

LD

Follow up on the news item about the EGI pilot for the Connect magazine

LD was not at the meeting

20150210-3

CLOSED

TTC

Consider the list of topics for the TAC, consult home organizations, discuss the topics during a separate meeting

TTC meeting (VC) regarding TAC topics: 9 March 14:00-16:00

 

2. Report from the Advisory Committee Meeting held during TNC and on TNC in general  - Valter,Licia and Peter

VN reported about the last TAC meeting. The meeting was not very interactive, despite some efforts to involve the participants. Clearly a different format is needed to make these meetings more effective. VN noted that the format and the existence of the TAC are being considered as part of the revision of the whole former TERENA Technical Programme.

There were two take away from the last TAC meeting:

VN asked whether there were other interesting outcome from TNC.

The general feeling was that side meetings are very valuable to TTC members and to many community members. TNC format could be changed to accommodate this need better.

ACTION: The TTC recommends TNC to consider a format where more side meetings are possible. Options could be to close the formal conference one day earlier and use the Thursday for WG meetings only.

Michael Enrico reporter about his conversation with Florence Hudson, the new I2 Chief Innovation Officer, and the innovation package she is working on. I2 seems to be more interested in the Internet of Things (IoT)  compared to the GÉANT community. ME noted that the EC has also allocated significant funding to develop IoT; several EU cities have benefited from that and have become ‘internet ready’.

ME feels that some of NRENs are potentially interested, and that it is still an area to monitor as far as GÉANT is concerned. It is difficult to say which aspect is really relevant for our community, as IoT covers a broad spectrum. There is potential for service offering in the future, maybe related to mobile services (i.e. wide sensor networks based on GSM) and data collected via them.

YM noted that there is a lot of interest in SDN; it is up to GÉANT to implement the recommendations in this place. 

RE noted there is a sufficient interest for next generation network discussion that could justify a SIG-NGN.  In light of the new H2020 a SIG could also be useful to spin off discussions on the preparation of open calls proposal (which are expected to become much more cross e-Infrastructures than what happened in the past) or other community projects.

3. Updates on GEANT (the association) work

4. Global initiatives and Projects - For INFORMATION

AARC – LF gave an update on the AARC project, which started on May 1st and will run for two years. The first couple of months have been mostly spent on preparing the detailed work plans and on forming the teams. The kick off meeting took place at the beginning of June; it was clearly a very high level meeting, where the various WP leaders presented and validated their initial ideas.

There area two deliverables due at the end of July: one on technical requirements that AARC should focus on to design the integrated architecture and the other on training.

SGA1 (GN4) – GN4 is progressing well; lots of preparation is being spent on the phase two which is expected to start in may 2016. There is a new task that NH is leading that is about looking at some of the requirements and their implications on the IdPs. This offers also an opportunity to link the eduGAIN policy work, the enabling users work and other relevant GÉANT work to REFEDS.

REFEDS – REFEDS celebrated this year its 10th anniversary. The group is very healthy, there is a lot of discussion on the list and a lot of work to be supported. The work plan is available on the REFEDS wiki as the rest of the material. NH is working with Heather Flanagan to kick of some additional work in the area of virtual organisations and groups. For more information please refer to:

https://wiki.refeds.org/display/WOR/2015+REFEDS+Workplan

5. Events

EWTI - In line of the open actions to cluster events, GÉANT is supporting the preparation of the next EWTI (European Workshop Trust and Identity) which will take place in December. There will be co-located events, such as a REFEDS BoF to prepare for the next workplan and a eduGAIN town hall meeting.

The EWTI event is totally organised by Identinetics GmbH, led by Rainer Horbe. GÉANT main contribution is in the promotion of the event to bring our community there; in return GÉANT community should benefit of some contacts with the government that Rainer has gained during his work as consultant. The MoU is for a one year support; an evolution will follow to decide on how to continue in the future.

Technology Exchange I2 – There will be a main REFEDS events on Sunday before the Technology Exchange meeting starts. Furthermore LF has submitted a request for a WG session to discuss about Sirtfi and assurance. AS has also submit a request for a session to discuss about community requirements as input for the current AARC project as well as consultation for the preparation of the next one.

6. TTC Members updates 

A round table of the TTC members followed.

Vicente Goyanes – It would be helpful if GÉANT could gather and share more information on NRENs international activities and if this information could be shared among universities. As we move towards services a closer interaction among campuses and with campuses and NRENs is needed.

Having the knowledge that the same service is available other countries can trigger discussion on how to access them and how to harmonise them.

JD showed the service matrix (https://compendium.terena.org/reports/nrens_services) , developed as part of the Compendium. This was extremely well received by the TTC. Thanks for Christian Gijtenbeek (developed it) and Jessica Willis for this result.

ACTION: The TTC recommends promoting service matrix widely and to make it easily accessible via the GÉANT website.

ACTION: The TTC recommends the TIC to endorse recommendations at GA level to ensure that more funding is allocated for campuses.


Davig Groep –
DG noted the high expectation in AARC on what it can achieve. We should manage this expectation so that communities will not be disappointed.  DG noted that AARC should look at a mechanism to address some general questions coming from the user communities. As an example he referred to a question asked on the RFEDS lists from CERN, which triggered long and convoluted answers, whereas a simple question could have been provided.

Valter  Nordth– Supporting GÉANT in updating the terms of reference for the technical programme. Plans are to present a draft for the next GA in September. Some TTC members’ terms have expired; Valter proposed to prolong the expired mandate until the end of 2015.  No objections were raised.

Peter SchoberIDM Issues in the R&E community

PSc, as part of the more in depth area presentation each TTC member offers, gave an overview of the authentication and authorisation practices in the R&E community.

There is still a lot of phising and asking subjects to use more and more complex passwords obviously won't help there. Mitigation for this are strong authentication, 2-factor authentication, multi-factor authentication, which in practice means a combination of independent authentication methods or technologies.

Yubikey and Google joined the FIDO alliance promoting 2-factor authentication (U2F: "Universal 2nd Factor") specs that use established technologies (RSA public key cryptography) and protocols that are now being integrated into the browser.

Most of the requirements for 2-factor authentication come from the users in the attempt to protect their passwords rather from the resources.

Despite what many believe, the second factor authentication is not really a way to increase the assurance that the credentials are used by the right people. To elevate the insurance other means are needed, i.e. verified process etc. which normally bring up the authentication costs.

A problem institutions still face is the request for password reset, which is still a time consuming operation and affects identity assurance.

PSc touched upon authorisation, which usually presupposes the user has been previously authenticated.

Identity management in the academic space is very complex as there are lots of different roles (and a combination of them at different levels) to handle. For some services authentication and authorisation overlap, but in general this is not a good practice. Commercial companies are expanding the authentication process with data mining, taking into account an ever growing list of contextual and environmental factors (OS, browser fingerprinting, IP addresses, geolocation, etc.)

Academic licenses can be complex so it is very difficult to translate them into operational procedures. An example of this is Clarin where the authorisation parameter chosen is to allow access to resources to "academics". They basically mapped a grant of rights limited to specific uses ("for educational, teaching or research purposes") into an authorisation process, not realising that there is no generally agreed upon concept (nor machine-consumable information in institutional IDM systems) for "academic". This approach is causing problems, as it's based on a fundamental misconception: No IDM process/authorisation attribute can ever give the license holder the assurance that the subject accessing the resource will be using it in accordance with the license terms.

PSc also touched upon provisioning, the process to make sure that data to be used in distributed environments are available in different places. One approach is to push the data to all applications for when they are needed ("just in case"); this model has issues with federated approaches as the number of applications might be huge, rapidly changing or unkown in advance.. The other approach is to provision the data when needed ("just in time"), which has issues with authorisation (e.g. authorising someone can only happen after they has been provisioned a local account for a person), resulting in awkward workflows. E.g. having to ask (and wait for) a group of people to log in to a system first (in order to get their accounts provisioned "just in time"), at which point those subjects do not have access to the resource, and then authorise them later (and ask the subjets to return after they have been properly authorised).

De-provisioning is normally not properly done, though there's some support in the protocols used; the general approach followed is to reset the password at the Identity Provider (and leave the data at SPs to rot).

The last part of the talk covered attributes and its usage. Typical problems in this area:

Currently the R&E community is using two main approaches or even a mix of them: a risk-based approach (REFEDS R&S) vs a full compliance one (GÉANT CoCo).

Lastly Peter touched upon eduGAIN and related services offered by GÉANT. Thanks to the work done by the community within the GÉANT project and within REFEDS, it is now much easier for an NREN to create a federation: there's a federation policy template, best practice documents, there is FaaS (video showcase) that offers a SAML entity registry, metadata aggregation, plus secure signing with a HSM (which makes support for local installation impossible), information on entity categories, discovery documentation and so on. 

PSc’ s presentation covered many interesting aspects; some TTC members asked which areas NRENs are really focusing on. 

ACTION: Peter to review his slides and distill what is being worked on and what is not being worked on.

 7. Next Meetings

There will be two upcoming meetings:

-       September 30th - a videoconference meeting to report on the revised technical programme

-       November 24th – Face-to-face meeting

8. Summary of the ACTIONS

Ref.

Status

Who

Action

Comment

20150708-01

OPEN

GÉANT

To consider a format for TNC where more side meetings are possible.

 

20150708-02

OPEN

GÉANT

To promote the service matrix widely and to make it easily accessible via the GÉANT website.

 

20150708-03

OPEN

VN

To talk to the TIC to ensure that T&I recommendations are known and endorsed by the GA. More funding to support integration at campus level is needed

 

20150708-04

OPEN

PSc

to review his slides and distil what is being worked on and what is not being worked on by the NRENs

 

 

20150210-2

OPEN

LD

Follow up on the news item about the EGI pilot for the Connect magazine

LD was not at the meeting