Leadership Council Teleconference - 2010-11-10

Owned by Former user (Deleted)
Last updated: Nov 14, 2010 by Former user (Deleted)Version comment

Kantara Leadership Council Teleconference

Date and Time

  • Date: Wednesday, November 10, 2010
  • Time: 9am PST | 12pm EST | 17:00 UTC (Time Chart)
  • Teleconference Options:
    • Skype: +9900827043671716
    • US Dial-In: +1-201-793-9022 | Room Code: 3671716

NOTES:

Attendees

  • Voting:
    1. Telecom Identity: Jonas Hogberg
    2. Consumer ID: Bob Pinheiro
    3. ID Assurance: Myisha Frazier-Mclveen
    4. Federation Interop: John Bradley
    5. UMA: Eve Maler
    6. P3WG: Jeff Stollman
    7. ULX: RLBob Morgan
    8. eGov: Colin Wallis
  • Non-voting:
    1. Staff: Dervla O'Reilly
    2. Identity Community Update: J. Trent Adams
    3. Map the Gap: J. Trent Adams
    4. Staff: Joni Brennan

Apologies

  • Japan WG: Toshihiro Suzuki

Agenda

  1. Roll Call for Quorum Determination
  2. Approval of prior meeting minutes
    1. Review: Leadership Council Teleconference - 2010-10-13 Minutes
    2. Review: Leadership Council Meeting - 2010-10-19 Notes
    3. Review: Leadership Council Teleconference - 2010-10-27 Notes
  3. LC Officer Election Results + Handover
  4. 2011 Budget Planning:
    1. Place a member on the Budget Planning Committee of the BoT
    2. Review: Submitted Requests
    3. Submit Requests to the BoT BPC
  5. Review Report Process in the OP
  6. Consider Submitted Reports:
    1. From InfoSharing WG
      1. Information Sharing Report
      2. pRFP Engagement Model
    2. From Telco ID WG
      1. Bridging IMS & Internet Identity white paper (version 1.1) + Disposition of Comments
  7. AOB

Minutes

  1. Roll Call for Quorum Determination
    • Quorum met with 8 voting members attending.
  2. Approval of prior meeting minutes
    1. Review: Leadership Council Teleconference - 2010-10-13 Minutes
    2. Review: Leadership Council Meeting - 2010-10-19 Notes
    3. Review: Leadership Council Teleconference - 2010-10-27 Notes
  3. LC Officer Election Results + Handover
    • We have a new slate of officers. John Bradley as chair, Pete Palmer as vice-chair, and Eve Maler as secretary. John took over chairing the meeting at this point.
    • Motion: Thank outgoing officers Trent and Colin. Carried by enthusiastic unanimous consent.
  4. 2011 Budget Planning:
    1. Place a member on the Budget Planning Committee of the BoT
      • To date, Trent has served in this role, though it's unclear whether this was tied to his LC chair role. It would be beneficial if he could continue in that role to avoid disruption at this critical time.
      • Motion: Install Trent as the LC member of the Budget Planning Committee. Carried by unanimous consent.
    2. Review: Submitted Requests
      • The process is similar to last year's. Requests are being evaluated in order to determine the 2011 Kantara Initiative budget. The evaluation involves assessing whether different groups are being under- or over-served in granting their requests, and balancing groups' requests with the overall KI budget.
      • Last year, the committee attached advice in forwarding certain requests to the BoT and recommending them for approval.
      • The requests this year total $225,000. KI treasurer Lucy Lynch is currently working to answer the question of how much is available in funds to satisfy the requests received. We can be somewhat interactive in determining this answer, given the BoT's discretion to disburse certain funds whose source dates from KI's creation.
      • The timeline for the LC giving advice to the BoT is very short; the hope had been to generate this by the Paris F2F timeframe. The 2010 budget allocation for groups was in the $150-170,000 range. Some items requested for the 2010 budget year were rejected and some were trimmed down; the amount requested was more like $200,000.
      • We agreed to form an informal subcommittee of Trent, John, and Eve (and later Pete) to run down answers generated in today's discussion and make recommendations to the entire LC by mid-next week, for final approval in our meeting the week of Wed Nov 24.
      • Bob P had asked a question in email about whether outside subcontractors are intended to do the work vs. group members; John suggested treating this as a standing question for each allocation request.
    3. Submit Requests to the BoT BPC
      • Before we can submit recommended requests, we need to get more input and clarifications from various groups on their requests sent to us. Questions and notes collected in this meeting are detailed below.
      • ULX: Continue UX Mock-Up Development
        • Previously this work was done on a volunteer basis, with some graphic elements subcontracted to a person who subsequently became a group participant in order to understand what was being asked of him. The current request is for continued contractor work. The allocation request is being made because the needed work requires a specialty in graphic design.
      • InfoSharing: Develop Sharing Agreements Supporting Trust Frameworks
        • Of the $10,000 requested last year, $7000 were spent, but some other funding that required a match has not yet been spent (though it is expected to be before year-end).
        • Trent believes the 2011 request is for work that must be performed by a legal expert (likely the development of information-sharing agreements). We need to check whether this is true, especially since the description on the web page doesn't seem to match this understanding.
      • P3WG: IAPP Workshop in March 2011
        • The $10,000 requested is for a sponsorship fee. Money to support making copies of workshop materials etc. is not being requested at this time.
      • P3WG: Privacy summit during the NIST IDTrust workshop in March 2011
        • Note that this is in the same month as the previous request. John also notes in passing that OASIS may not be involved in the IDtrust event in 2011.
        • What exactly would the $4000 be spent on? Would the P3WG participation be part of a larger event or its own event? We need more answers from Abbie.
      • P3WG: Privacy event during the Burton Europe event in Summer 2011
        • Again, we need more answers from Abbie, similarly to the previous allocation request. In the past, Kantara has secured a space and paid for it with sponsorships by various Kantara members. For the Concordia authorization workshop, equipment and catering cost about $1200 but there were no room fees. Other times, there have been room fees.
      • P3WG: Perform audit of current KI work and programs for policy and privacy impacts
        • This item has been retracted.
      • Healthcare: Patient ID Portal: Phase 2
        • This request involves doing marketing to find matching funding (rather than requiring matching funds itself). We need to confirm this.
        • This group has been working with external funders on Phase 1. Would Kantara's normal marketing activities (using general funds) be available for this at all? The 2011 general marketing activities might be expanded to be applicable to some of this.
        • We're waiting for some legal agreements for matching funds to come through in order for the group's 2010 allocation to be spent; it's anticipated this will happen in time.
        • Lucy is currently working on disbursing 2010 funds and figuring out what amounts can be officially recovered on the books vs. spent.
        • Bob P observes that our policy about needing to grant exemptions to allocate funds to group participants is looking awkward, given that e-Citizen is another example of funding going to a participant. Trent notes that, in this case, e-Citizen joined the group in order to ensure IP protection.
        • We agreed to look at the current policy and see if the exemption-granting process is still the right one to use in accounting for these circumstances.
      • Japan: Translate Kantara IAF into Japanese
        • Some answers to the Japan WG allocation request issues were sent to the list. They have themselves generated more questions, e.g. around additional expenses over time as IAF gets revised and around establishing demand for translated versions of the documents.
      • Japan: Translate General Press Releases (10 translations)
        • What does "generic press releases" mean? Obviously we don't want to pay for non-Kantara-related press releases. We're guessing that this means the estimate doesn't take into account Kantara-specific language needs.
        • What was done last year? There was a single larger allocation request for press-related activities. This year, this particular piece has been broken out, but historically this is indeed the cost.
      • Japan: Event Support: Database Management (3 events)
        • This request appears to be in support of what amounts to a CRM system for event attendees. What is the expected ROI of treating event attendees essentially as prospective customers? Does it have to do with the IAF specifically?
      • Japan: Event Support: Management and Reception (3 events)
        • This is for the same three events as the previous allocation requests. Since this one mentions registrant database management, does it overlap with the previous allocation request? This apparent overlap may be an artifact of Trent's process of separating out the elements of the original larger undifferentiated request; we believe the $8000 is for event fees, catering, etc.
        • Can we find out exactly the events the Japan WG held last year and their costs and results?
        • Bob P believes that some Japan-based funders are in some fashion helping to fund the healthcare group's activities, so perhaps this is one thing to examine in measuring ROI. We should perhaps circle back with Nat Sakimura to learn more.
      • Federation interop: Interoperability Event Support
        • The plan is to ensure that Kantara interoperability events that would otherwise be unfunded will still be held. Should this come from general Kantara funds? The intent in making the allocation request was to help the group target participation in events that will directly support interop testing. Not all Kantara events are appropriate for such testing. This request could be seen as ensuring that an appropriate Kantara event will definitely be held so that the group can "piggyback on" it, or in other words as a guarantee that at least one venue will be found for such testing.
      • Federation interop: Testing, Prototype, and Tools Hosting / Support
        • The group is looking for creative ways to defer these costs, but it's anticipated that such costs will arise. Though the request itself is short on detail, the amount seems quite light for such a large benefit. John (as group chair) is hopeful that partnering with entities like the Internet Society will be productive.
      • IAWG: SAC Document Update
        • The total of all four IAWG requests is in the $100,000 range. Can we figure out how IdPs and RPs that are beneficiaries of IAWG outputs could kick in? At the same time, such parties are expected to pay for IAWG services. Can we assess the ROI of IAWG more precisely, given that identity assurance certification is intended to be something like a "profit center" (a capital-p certification Program)? In 2010, the market wasn't quite ready for us to see revenues from this activity. However, momentum is building and we expect 2011 to be more active in this regard. As a Program, ultimately this might be run with a separate budget, but for now, the BoT has asked the LC to consider these allocation requests more in the spirit of being a unified project.
        • RLBob notes that the InCommon Federation is experiencing similar sunk-cost kinds of issues, and in latter times has experienced an upsurge in interest. And John sees a brightening picture from where he sees as well, with non-zero revenue on the 2011 horizon.
      • IAWG: Profile Document Creation and Update
        • At this juncture, Trent suggests treating the first three IAWG allocation requests as a package.
      • IAWG: Support to ISO JTC1 SC27 Liaison (2 meetings in 2011)
        • This is the one request that is not like the others. It's essentially a request for SC27 prep work, travel, and post-meeting work. In general, travel budget requests have been denied in the past. The LC should take this into account.
  5. Review Report Process in the OP - deferred
  6. Consider Submitted Reports:
    1. From InfoSharing WG
      1. Information Sharing Report
      2. pRFP Engagement Model
        • ACTION ITEM: Eve to contact Joe to establish his willingness to do an electronic ballet for these two papers, and if so, put together electronic ballets for them, to be started no later than Monday.
    2. From Telco ID WG
      1. Bridging IMS & Internet Identity white paper (version 1.1) + Disposition of Comments
        • ACTION ITEM: Eve to put together an electronic ballet for this paper, to be started no later than Monday.
  7. AOB
    • ACTION ITEM: Eve to informally poll the LC on the email list and, if okay, arrange with staff to move the Nov 24 meeting wholesale to Nov 22.

Next Teleconference

  • Date: Wednesday, November 24, 2010? (likely to be moved two days earlier)
  • Time: 3pm PST | 6pm EST | 22:00 UTC (Time Chart)
  • Teleconference Options:
    • Skype: +9900827043671716
    • US Dial-In: +1-201-793-9022 | Room Code: 3671716

NOTES: