EDUCAUSE has just announced a tag for their upcoming conference. It looks like the will aggregate the various RSS feeds into a single page.

connect.educause.edu | Technology In Academia — Connect @ EDUCAUSE
Tagging the Annual Conference

If you’re blogging the conference or uploading photos from the show to a site that supports tagging (ala Flickr), please use EDUCAUSE_ANNUAL to classify your entries. We’ll be displaying aggregate information in the right-hand column at the url below:

http://connect.educause.edu/folksonomy/educause_annual

George: Opening comment about presentation “Identity 2.0″ at OSCON 2005

### Shift in Identity discusion

Students provide a lot of personal information on Facebook but they also turn on the FERPA flags to protect their information from “the institution”. Steve asked about Linked In.

Movement towards people being responsible for their own attributes and expression of their attributes.

### Agenda:

1. Review the notes from I2FMM on Jim’s blog.
2. Follow up from the I2FMM – what are the next steps.
3. Using the I2FMM and Internet2 tags.
4. Spring Member Meeting – a set of tags.

### Next Steps and Collaboration Discussion

Request for an itinerary building – more of a My Member Meeting view
Having a simple tag or set of tags would be a simple

This group could identify collaboration tools – a few tools – that would be useful in this area.

* File Sharing
* CMS
* Blog
* Wiki

Basic idea is to have a common toolset that is available to a Working Group.

* Jim pushes back on the idea that Internet2 should provide all of the tools (wiki, blog, cms, IPTV sharing system)
* Internet2 could provide a couple of aggregators – a Technorati like directory and a del.icio.us like aggregators

Steve – issues with Intellectual Property and Participation is based on Membership. You can only be on a working group if you are a paying member.

=== Signet is starting Phase 6: Proxy and bootstrapping roles. ===

Phase 7 includes rules for applying prereqs and conditions.

Release 1.0 will be a UI, XML release without a finalized API.

* next steps could include the API
* other things might take priority
* if you want to write a connector, you could use the API or the XML

SPML privilege engine would be a cool fit into Signet. Service Provisioning Markup Language

What is the correct progression or flow for all of the work that is in front of the group? Connecting Signet to other infrastructure is important in the early days – to PeopleSoft or Nexus.

Signet Subject API – Subject Java API Specification

The Signet web site on Internet2

Signet Demo

XACML markup language for expressing access control via web services call against Signet.

=== Group v0.6 – Released 16 September 05 ===

Added a GUI that fully exposes the API
Basic group and namespace management, subgroups, complete security model.

Mid- November – mostly refactoring internal functions.
Additional search capabilities

Version 1.0 due in mid-January 2006 will include Group Math

- Support for Union, Intersection and Compliment group math
- Group math will be simple

Version 1.1 due in mid-March 2006 group and membership aging and expanded configuration.

Serge Olivier discussing the Domain Keys Identified Mail (DKIM) anti-spam systems.

Craig Hancock discussing RPM packages for Linux installs.

DKIM – PKI is not required since the public keys are published via DNS. You don’t have to distribute private keys to end users. Keys are added by the first MTA. It does require SMTP/AUTH inside the domain.

With DKIM – some headers are part of the digital signature. There could be transformation of the message somewhere along the way. Canonization algorithm is used so that some changes will not break the signature: removal of white space, empty lines etc.

Antispam filters want to use reputation services. These services are only useful if you are sure that sender hasn’t been spoofed.

DKIM doesn’t specify how Mailing List Management software should handle the signing and forwarding of the email. The MLM could be a thin as possible, the MLM could remove the first signature and resign the email or the MLM could add a second signature.

Hopes for approval by IETF.

Craig Hancock – University of Notre Dam

RPM Packages for Sympa under Linux.

My opening comments are included in my PDF.

George Brett’s opening comments:

1. The recent Wizards Meeting used wiki’s for real-time posting of notes and documents. This was a shift from the usual – mailing list and weekly phone call.
1. Ineternet2 has many communities of interest. Those communities can aggregate to form larger communities. You can imagine a vin diagram of nested and overlapping circles that represents these groups.
1. He will be listening to see what these people think about these topics and to look for direction for Internet2′s collaboration and communication.

JPR’s Demo of MyVOCS.

Discussion Portion of the Meeting

Internet2 currently has about 15,000 Sympa email users. Internet2′s 15,000 email addresses may not represent 15,000 users. It represents 15K identities. Shibboleth could push us all to one identity but not necessarily so. You could have one identity for each IdP that you belong to.

Balance the political need to control and organize information vs. personal desire and choices for how to handle information. Pushing information out for the use of the masses vs. controlling information because of privacy fears.

What is the learning curve for new users using these tools? For the Folksonomy stuff it is pretty low and simple. For MyVOCS, people get hung up on the shibboleth portion.

Jill – hoping to learn what other open source collaboration tools people are interested in using. John-Paul – this is much like our desktop analogy. You find new tools you like. By having this common identity management framework, you can easily add new tools.

What about delegated administration? The goal is push the administration out. The MyVOCS space is pretty wide open. Anyone can create a new VO and become the new administrator for that VO. They have all of the capabilities as an administrator.

Can the average user do that or do the tools need to be simplified? Depends on what tools they have used before. Jump in and start using these tools.

Internet2 is a big user of Sympa. If we wanted to delegate this out to chair of a working group. Can these chairs handle the delegation of rights (read/write by group, readable by everyone, etc)? What you need to know is how to handle administration of Sympa. All of the rights flow from Sympa out to the other tools.

Sympa developers are active in the MList project. The MList follows this meeting. We can take is GUI and functional issues back to the developers if we need to.

Part of this is a training issue also. These chairs need to understand the space and the best use of these tools.

There is an issue of how to mailing list attributes (members can post but everyone can read archives) translate to other tools (what happens in the wiki)? That is where the tool provider/configurer must make intelligent decision. They chose Drupal because it understands assertions but the wiki doesn’t.

Issue of email address as an identifier. In MyVOCS it is NetID@IdentityProvider. Sympa is moving towards netid@idp also.