Page History

...

The update presented to the ITLC can be found here: https://spaces.ais.ucla.edu/display/uctrustwg/Update+For+ITLC+-+September+2011^{Image Removed}

This summary page was shared with the ITCL and includes resource estimates. It goes over how we are using the InCommon Silver audit as a replacement for the UC Trust Basic audit that we are all overdue for. Dedra had a conversation with Ann West to re-energize the effort from InCommon to reach out to campuses and federations to see where we are, and how InCommon can help.

...

All the resource estimates are shown on the update page as well. Dedra told the ITLC that this is the amount necessary to get the campuses to InCommon Silver, but not to re-credential people. These estimates also do not include the cost of the actual audit; however, since most of the work is on the Identity Management teams, the total audit cost should not be that high.

As a side note, the UCLA estimate is a total effort and does not include students. our estimate is our total budget. we are not going to They will not be asking for any money ; we because they already have the funding .
dedra: the idea was to give them an idea of what it will take for our campuses to get to incommon silver. to remind the CIO's that we are all overdue for our uc trust basic, and that the CIO needs to be in touch w/ their identity management lead to see what needs to be done.to cover the estimated costs.

Dedra notes that she will add a column to this table to differentiate between money that will have to be asked for versus existing money.

LBNL also says that they resource estimate side: total resource estimate vs resources required - is there asking involved? asking for resources?
ucla has money to do this, anyone else? lbnl will not ask for more money, its since this is already part of their identity management Identity Management strategic plan
ucsc - .
UCSC notes that it's not money per se, just asking for existing people's timearlene: what is the meaning of this table? if this is going to be consumed by the existing IT org, then this table is misleading?
dedra: need a new column - for new money needed, vs. existing money

A cross institutional audit team - was suggested to ITLC, to be lead by carl heinz; definite positive reaction to Karl Heins; ITLC was in agreement of this idea. endorsed by ITLC (the idea). we shouldnHowever, we probably won't put together this together team until we get have at least a couple campuses that are ready (almost) to certify.

dedra: do anyone have timeline of certification?
albert: does the hR/pps require incommon? because if so then the timeline is jan 2013 for UCLA.
dedra: will they require silver loa?
albert: i would assume they would.
arlene: uc trust basic is loa2, the campuses have the luxury of deciding what they will adhere to.
d: some campuses who are at ucturst basic they might not meet. campus should go through basic audit at minimum. since some might not even meet. for those joining hr/pps - for any campus. but then why not just use incommon silver for the framework?

someone: do audit both ways. silver, when it fails, go against uc trust basic.

d: ask carl to point out differences between silver and basic frameworks so we can know where the differences are?

someone: differences are more in the campuses' assumptions/interpretations. 1/3 of steering committee at ucsc is no longer there. it wasn't an audit, it was just senior management making a decision that their practices match what the requirements should be.

ask hr/ pps to clarify whether or not hr/pps will require incommon silver or basic for hr administrators logging in. us as the uc trust workgroup can ask them , says d.

Dedra asks the group if anyone has a timeline of certification. Albert responds that if HR/PPS requires InCommon Silver, then the timeline will be January 2013 for UCLA.

Dedra brings up the point that for some of those joining the HR/PPS may not even meet the UC Trust Basic standards, so perhaps those campuses should go through the Basic audit at minimum. But in that case, why not just use the InCommon Silver for the audit framework? A response suggest that we do the audit both ways; use Silver, but where it fails, use Basic.

Dedra mentions that we can ask Karl to point out the differences between the Silver and Basic frameworks so we can know what they are. At the very least, we ast the UC Trust Workgroup can ask HR/PPS to clarify whether or not the system will require InCommon Silver for the HR administrators logging in. Eric points out that in order for us to even ask this question, the numbers have to be there eric: but the numbers have to be there for us to ask the question so that we can tell them if the answer is yes, then UCLA or whoever each campus will have to spend X number of dollars to meet this requirement.

berkeley: submitted her proposal for the 156 mil or whatever for certification cost and it has been granted. d will come up w/ project plan within the next month. d asks ucsb - arlene will certify silver but will not offer it as a service to campus yet. d: doing documentation work and submitting to ITLC, will you do it soon? arlene: yes its already done.

...