Today a significant proportion of US researchers are unable to access services using a federated identity because their home institution does not operate a suitable InCommon identity provider (IdP). XSEDE users currently reside at over 500 US higher education institutions, while fewer than 130 institutions operate "research and scholarship” compatible InCommon IdPs (https://spaces.internet2.edu/x/-IKVAQ). As a result, XSEDE users have difficulty accessing federated services (e.g., GENI, LIGO, and other international science projects).
To address this need, XSEDE should operate an InCommon IdP for XSEDE users, allowing them to authenticate with their XSEDE Kerberos/Duo credentials for access to services federated by InCommon.
No comments provided – all materials looked good as is.
Review Input Documents
- Design/Security overview
- Installation guide
- Deployment Plan
- User guide
- Defect, issue, and risk reporting
- See XCI-30 test plan below
- Acceptance test plan
- Testing resources
- portal.xsede.org and cilogon.org
Package information: All software packages (e.g., server and client packages) for this CI are listed.
Documentation and Installation instructions: The deployment plan for this CI on XSEDE is clearly described as well as the installation instructions and any XSEDE specific configuration instructions.
Test environment and facilities: The test environment needed to adequately to validate this component is described. Should indicate also whether testing can be performed within a VM and if not, the reasons for it.
Assumptions: Lists any assumptions needed before testing can begin (e.g., accounts needed).
Test procedures, cases, and scenarios: Lists the tests that should be run or an associated test suite and expected performance metrics if applicable.
Defect, issue, and risk reporting: Deployment plans should include defect and issue reporting information. The testing plan could reference that same information from the deployment plan, or provide alternate information if defects and issues need to be reported differently during testing. Risks, as well as defects and issues, should be part of the testing report.
ScheduleCurrent Date: 2021-04-22
Current Status: Closed (Test Readiness Review)
|Target Date||Actual Date||Activity Milestone|
|2017-04-26||Review launch date|
|2017-05-01||Written feedback due (Reviewers)|
|2017-05-03||2017-05-02||Written response date (Review Material Developers)|
|2017-05-04||2017-05-02||Final approval due and completion date (Reviewers)|
Review Last Updated: 2017-05-02 6:35 pm
If you are a reviewer, please login to sign or withdraw from this review.
- Peter Enstrom
SIGNED: 2017-04-27 16:35
- Shava Smallen
SIGNED: 2017-05-02 21:30
- Terrence Fleury
SIGNED: 2017-04-26 11:07
- Victor Hazlewood
- Gary Rogers
Review Material Developers