Present: Mark Aldenderfer, Arlene Allen, Jeffery Barteet, Polly Bustillos, Larry Carver, Glenn Davis, Saturnino Doctor, Doug Drury, Matthew Dunham, George Gregg, Rick Johnson, Bill Koseluk, Shea Lovan, Elise Meyer, Bruce Miller, Alan Moses, Stan Nicholson, Jamie Sonsini, Heidi Straub, Robert Sugar, Paul Valenzuela, Craig Welsh
AuthDir
The discussion of the acquisition of the Authorization Software started with a reminder of what was proposed and what was funded. Based on Mark’s note to the EVC, the functionality that was funded was delegated administration and single-sign-on in a web environment. It was also clarified that the staffing that was funded meant allocating funds to existing staff to work on the directory, rather than requiring the hiring of new staff. A draft RFQ was distributed including a Purpose and Background for the authorization software, which would integrate with the current directory, save different attributes for individuals, and allow for “single sign on” in a web-based format. The RFQ would request a minimum set of requirements and include technologies that would chase the fundamental requirements. The draft indicated that basic requirements and general requirements are very closely interrelated. The final section of the draft included some aspects that would be interesting to have but not necessary to include in the bidding process. During the ensuing discussion, it was noted that the services that would be included in the RFQ would need to be more clearly identified, and the issue of role decisions on legacy databases needed to be addressed. IS&C indicated that support in the area of application development in using the software would be available to departments as they come along. Concern was expressed that the RFQ for the software did not include a clear description of its planned use. It was also felt that it is important that the campus should be clearly informed as to what this program is and does. Comments were solicited, and should be sent to Arlene Allen.
There was discussion about whether the timing for acquiring this software should be driven by the need to provide MSOs with the ability to update their department’s data for the 03/04 published directory process. It was decided that it was more important to get the best solution for the campus than to rush the process to meet that one need. The two big hurdles to developing the RFQ were to get participation from all of the necessary parties, and to make sure that the participants had enough knowledge of the technology to develop an appropriate set of requirements for this product. To move this project along, a “Strike Group” was proposed to come up to speed on the technology, and then to draft the RFQ. The group should get together as soon as possible, as this will require substantial commitment. The OIT will send email to control points soliciting participation for meetings next week, and anyone on the ITPG interested in participating is welcome and should contact either Arlene directly or go through their control point. Input should include comments from service providers and system administrators, but not necessarily by end users. Single sign-on is a basic given, but more exotic features need to be studied. The RFQ should cover as many areas (uses) as possible, and there should be some expectation control; lots of “bang for the buck” without changing the basic project. The goal is to have the RFQ completed by 1/31/03.
Back to ITPG Meeting Schedule
