**MACE Call 15-February-2010**
Renee Shuey, Penn State (stand-in chair)
Steven Carmody, Brown U.
Leif Johansson, SUNET/NORDUnet
Jim Jokl, U. Virginia
David Wasley, independent
Mark Poepping, CMU
Renee Frost, Internet2
Scott Cantor, The Ohio State U.
Ann West, Internet2
Neal McBurnett, Internet2
Steve Olshansky, Internet2 (scribe)
*New Action Item*
[AI] (Leif) will follow up with Josh about discussing MoonShot on the next MACE (special topic) call
[AI] (Leif) will contact Ken/Steven/Tom about potential overlaps between the SDCI proposal and projects in the EU.
*Carryover Action Items*
[AI] (All) attending EMC2/REfeds/Mobility, please contact Ken.
[AI] (Leif) will discuss the IDTrust meeting on the PKNG list, seeking feedback.
[AI] (Jens) will speak to an Eduroam rep about communicating with Educause.
[AI] (Ken) will draft and circulate a letter to Rice leadership, requesting input to roadmaps and use cases, and to ensure our projects with Kuali projects are aligned with their high-level strategic direction.
[AI] (Nate) will distribute information to the list about upcoming tactical issues facing MACE
[AI] (All) send Bamboo IAM comments to Tom ASAP for coordination.
[AI] (All) interested in participating in the international collaboration activity contact RL "Bob."
[AI] (RL "Bob") will contact a representative of Kuali Rice about coordinating a call.
[AI] (Ken and Mark) will distribute some information on trust anchors in the context of dynamic network configuration in GENI testbed, as well as for general access control.
[AI] (Ken) will circulate some meeting notes from the last TERENA/ REFEDS meetings.
- Internet2 Spring Member Meeting
Tom is on the program committee representing middleware. There were more proposals submitted than open slots, but some were merged. The schedule is being finalized now...
The InCommon Forum will not be Monday side meeting as in the past, but instead will be Tuesday 8:30-10 am. The MACE/Salsa dinner will be Tuesday evening as in the past. The international reception will be Wed. night.
A list of Middleware and Security sessions will be forthcoming, hopefully in iCal as well.
Registration is open now.
- Review/feedback chart of key aspects/roles of four related groups - Mace, InCommon-TAC, InCommon-Steering and AMSAC
(cf. Ken's mail to the list 11-Feb)
-- Aside from REFEDS, the EU groups are not represented - (1) TERENA TF-* which have F2F meetings, and (2) GEANT groups which are project oriented with deliverables and goals. There are certainly overlaps, esp. with the TERENA groups, and work is ongoing, but this is probably out of scope for this document... Overlap is OK if it doesn't become unhealthy conflict. More participation from US folks would be a good thing, esp. in the GEANT groups -- e.g. Edugain.
-- InC TAC seems to have a broader portfolio than Just InC federation, since InC seems to be taking on a larger scope - IdM practices, CAMP, etc... Where there are gaps, MACE is the group of first or last resort.
-- How is ITANA different in scope from the MACE "campus-middleware-centric perspective"? ITANA seems to extend beyond middleware, e.g. SOA and EA.
-- The evolving relationship between I2 and InC seems unclear, e.g. moving the MW program under InC and what this will mean. Understanding this better is a precursor to understanding the relationships with MACE and the other groups. If MACE eventually falls under the InC umbrella in some meaningful way, that leaves AMSAC as the sole outlier, and how do they relate? The significant overlap in membership between MACE and InC-TAC seems to be a very positive thing.
The InC spinoff groups are very useful in covering important topics, and MACE seems more focused on plumbing.
-- Where to address specific questions or issues seems to be unclear at times.
-- MACE's independence is a very positive thing, serving in a advisory and leadership role for the other groups.
-- Integration was an early MACE focus area, but MACE has evolved into sponsoring WGs and SW development projects. Making a more explicit statement of focus on integration may be a positive thing. But is this the ground that ITANA is now covering? ITANA was started in large part to focus on areas MACE is not addressing, e.g. the "upper middleware" space and EA.
-- MACE seems that it is not narrowing in scope, so much as not expanding. Federation and IAM seem to be so complex that MACE naturally has spent the majority of its time on these, and not e.g. on workflow.
-- ITANA is really complementary to MACE, about the practice of being an architect, including the artifacts and processes.
-- There is nothing holding MACE back from working on other areas, but other groups working on other areas as they are inclined to is a positive thing.
-- This whole topic ought to be readdressed periodically (6-12 months?), and a call with some key AMSAC members would be a very positive thing.
-- Some of the MACE-sponsored WGs have promulgated standards (e.g. eduPerson etc.) and none of the other groups seem to be doing that (including the EU groups?). MACE (and Internet2) are also IPR stewards.
-- The world has changed in significant ways since MACE formed. The early audience was US R-1 campuses, but now is broader US higher-ed as well as a set of international partners. This requires different approaches...
- Special topic calls (with invited guests as appropriate)
It would be best to have these queued up in advance so people can prepare. See for reference a (restricted access) list in progress at https://spaces.internet2.edu/display/MACE/MACE+topic+backlog
-- Scott volunteered to shepherd non-web auth for the next call. Perhaps Josh could report on the MoonShot GEANT3 project. Leif will talk with him about timing on this. If Josh is not available, then the suggestion was to go with the role of architecture in IAM/middleware
-- Other suggestions discussed on the call:
-- What is the relationship between the MACE definition of campus middleware, and WindowsLive and Google. Are there issues making it difficult for campuses, and if so what is the role of MACE or the other groups to try and facilitate solutions to those issues. (next after the above 2)
-- How various campuses are addressing privacy and user consent
- NSF SDCI proposal update
See the solicitation at http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2010/nsf10508/nsf10508.htm
"Synopsis of Program:
The purpose of the Software Development for Cyberinfrastructure (SDCI) program is to develop, deploy, and sustain a set of reusable and expandable software components and systems that benefit a broad set of science and engineering applications. SDCI is a continuation of the NSF Middleware Initiative (NMI) in an expanded context appropriate to the current expanded vision of cyberinfrastructure."
This program supports software development across five major software areas: system software and tools for High Performance Computing (HPC) environments; software promoting NSF's strategic vision for digital data; network software to support distributed software, software in the form of middleware capabilities and services, and cybersecurity. SDCI funds software activities for enhancing scientific productivity and for facilitating research and education collaborations through sharing of data, instruments, and computing and storage resources. The program requires open source software development."
Ken has been shepherding a proposal, nearing completion, including 2 major NSF VOs: LIGO and iPlant, leveraging I2MI collaboration infrastructure and tools. One of the deliverables proposed is federated SSH, including user provisioning but not including using SAML inside an SSH client. Extending Grouper to support federated groups is also going to be proposed. There will be funding requested to support integrators within LIGO and iPlant.
Leif noted some potential overlap with some projects in the EU, and will follow up with Ken/Steven/Tom...
Anyone attending relevant meetings is encouraged to add notes and comments in the wiki (restricted) https://spaces.internet2.edu/display/MACE/Meeting+Reports