Identity Commons "3.0" Big Tent Creation

From IIW

Issue/Topic:dentity Commons “3.0” Big Tent Creation (F1F)

Conference: IIW-East September 9-10, 2010 in Washington DC Complete Set of Notes

Convener: Kaliya Hamlin

Notes-taker(s): Drummond Reed

Tags for the session - technology discussed/ideas considered:

Discussion notes, key understandings, outstanding questions, observations, and, if appropriate to this discussion: action items, next steps:

Julie Fung
Don Thibeau - OpenID Foundation and Open Identity Exchange 
Joni Brennan - Kantara 
David Wasley - InCommon
Paul Trevithick - Interested in the cross-tribe conversation
John Bradley - Co-chair of one of the current IC workgroups (OSIS)
Barbara Bowen - Designer/developer/marketing - interested in the big tent
Mary Ruddy - Current chair of Identity Commons 
Austin Fath - Interested in clearer picture of the space
Ian Glaser - Gartner, wants to see what the new scorecard will look like
Trent Adams - ISOC - wants to learn about 3.0
Ankit Kapasi - Consultant, working with fed/state/local governments, wants to   give them the best options about how to get citizens on their networks
Bill Braithwaite - Physician, also known as "Dr. HIPPA", working with a 
Phil Windley - Wants to see IC stop suffering and grow to the next level
Drummond Reed - ICF, OASIS XRI and XDI, wants to see what third generation looks like
Kaliya - has been working with IC for a long time, wants to see how IC can be more effective
Lark Allen - Wave Systems, wants to see how level 2 and 3 authentication fit into open identity
Rainer - interested in how existing federations fit into a larger picture
Charles Andres - wants to see how the next generation will work
Tony Nadalin

Identity Commons (IC) today is a loose affiliation of different organizations and workgroups.

Mary summarized the impetus for this conversation: 1. Some of its member groups/orgs or prospective member groups/orgs are at inflection points.

2. Some of the funders of those groups/orgs are interested in simpler funding model, lower overhead, and greater cooperation/synergy.

3. There is a desire for a more comprehensive international involvement/coverage.

4. There is a desire to simplify messaging and confusion in the market.

Other observations about motivations:

  •   Consolidated/coordinated messaging.
  •   Eliminate duplication
  •   Expand coverage to other groups/bodies that are not currently touched upon/coordinated with
  •   Have a clearer answer about who should talk to who about what
  •   More curation

Joni observed that Kantara has also evolved a long ways.

Tony observed that there has not been much "action" coming out of some of the orgs, i.e., actual specs and real positive initiatives. So right now they are not perceived as being a good return on investment.

Tony used the analogy of a "hotel" where there is a known set of facilities for supporting collaboration, but each group can set up their own particular meeting space and agenda.

Tony does not believe it should become a standards body -- there are already enough of those. Joni pointed out that Kantara agrees with this and that Kantara WGs are not intended to be SDOs.

Don believes that the IC3 proposal has merit -- it needs to be fleshed out. But he wants to find out who are the other companies who are interested, and how interested, i.e., at one level of funding.

Trent's perspective from an ISOC standpoint is to ask more questions about the hotel concept, and drill down into the specifics about issues like IPR. Is it really just about "paint, power, pipe"? Optics are important.

Kaliya feels there are some core functions that IC3 needs to offer that at its "core" that are should not be optional functions.

Kaliya said another key concept is to have Focus Areas that allow groups to cluster. Ian agreed, pointing out areas like health care, smart grid, etc.

Trent mentioned that IC3 might want to consider becoming a grant funding target as that would attract different groups that either are seeking funding or that want to provide funding.

Lark offered the analogy of it becoming the "United Way for identity". Drummond suggested it would be ideal to do a bullet point of the deltas between IC2 and IC3.

We discussed the following concrete next steps:

1.  Write up a specific proposal for IC3: Mary, Kaliya, Drummond.

2.  Determine the actual companies who are interested in funding: Mary, Kaliya, Drummond.

3.  Have a discussion with ISOC about cooperation—Trent will be point.

4.  Have a discussion with Kantara about cooperation—Joni will be point.

5.  Have a discussion with Gartner—Ian Glazer will be point.

6.  Determine if there are funders willing to fund the legal/accounting work necessary for the transition—Mary and Kaliya.

7.  Put the proposal to IC2 Stewards for approval action—Mary and Kaliya.

8.  Open the new entity to funders and participating WGs.