Skip to Content.

edugain-discuss - Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] Assessment of Russia/RUNNet AAI for eduGAIN membership

edugain-discuss AT lists.geant.org

Subject: An open discussion list for topics related to the eduGAIN interfederation service.

List archive


Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] Assessment of Russia/RUNNet AAI for eduGAIN membership


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Brook Schofield <brook.schofield AT geant.org>
  • To: Peter Schober <peter.schober AT univie.ac.at>
  • Cc: "edugain-discuss AT lists.geant.org" <edugain-discuss AT lists.geant.org>, Порхачев Василий <porhachev AT runnet.ru>, "Ilya V. Vasiliev" <vasilyev AT runnet.ru>
  • Subject: Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] Assessment of Russia/RUNNet AAI for eduGAIN membership
  • Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 11:10:47 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-AU, en-US
  • Authentication-results: prod-mail.geant.net (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=danteonline.onmicrosoft.com
  • Authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=brook.schofield AT geant.org;
  • Spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
  • Spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99



On 14 Mar 2018, at 8:53 pm, Peter Schober <peter.schober AT univie.ac.at> wrote:

* Brook Schofield <brook.schofield AT geant.org> [2018-03-13 19:00]:
This application is from an organisation that is closely aligned
with the GÉANT community and their participation in eduGAIN will
further build links to RUNNet and the Russian Academic community.

Would anyone care to spend just a few words on the [lack of]
relationship with фEDUrus who have sigend the eduGAIN policy almost 5
years ago and already have registered 14 SPs and 9 IDPs?
The more the merrier, of course, but can we at least assume that tools
or more importantly knowledge (and maybe metadata) are being shared?

-peter

Peter (& everyone else interested),

Work with RUNNet started about 2 years ago and at that time their focus was to work with фEDUrus to support an identity federation that supports their membership. For some reason (that I’m not privy to) that collaboration didn’t complete and RUNNet asked me whether it was permissible for a separate federation to be formed and the implications of that.

I also raised this topic at the last SG meeting of overlapping federations joining (because of RUNNet AAI, as well as multiple federations from China and a new Omani federation appearing). This wasn’t seen as a concern. https://wiki.geant.org/display/eduGAIN/eduGAIN+SG-2018+January

I’ve also recently asked the long term candidates about their intention with respect to eduGAIN in the short-/mid-term. фEDUrus responded that they are promising to do more work in this space so we hope to see updates to their website/policy soon - and that their focus is their library association ARLICON and specifically their membership in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan so their target audience/memberships isn’t the same as RUNNet AAI.

I hope that these federations will be able to interoperate as eduGAIN members since they weren’t able to collaborate closer to home and that the membership of both organisations will benefit from eduGAIN participation.

-Brook



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

Top of Page