Hal,
Great response. I'll reply inline.
Don;
Hal Lockhart wrote:
Don,
Thanks for taking the initiative on this.
> Dear Fellow SAML Interop 2002 Participants,
> My name is Don Bowen and I am leading the SAML Interop
> coordination for Sun. I am working closely with our
> engineering team, which is building our first SAML-compliant
> product, now called Sun ONE Identity Server.
> I know Prateek Mishra from Netegrity has sent out a
more
> formal proposal for the technical focus for the interop
and I
> hope to see more responses to that proposal soon. At
the same
> time I believe there is a need to start thinking about
this
> event from a little higher level and to begin to map
out a
> timetable and the details for how we will make this
happen.
> If for some reason I have missed a prior effort by someone
> else on the list to initiate this same activity, my
> apologies. I am just getting a little concerned with
time and
> having recently been a Burton Group employee, I know
the
> level of professionalism attendees will expect (and
I'm sure
> many of you do as well).
I am confident you didn't miss anything. ;-)
> I would like to schedule a conference call as soon as
> possible, possibly as early as next week, to discuss
some of
> the following issues and others, which we can hopefully
> identity via email in the next few days.
Can Sun sponsor a conference bridge? Next Tuesday (4/23)
at 12:00 EDT would be a good time as the regular SAML call has been canceled.
Yes, I should be able to set up a bridge for that time. I will need to
know how many lines to reserve. Also, aren't you on standard time now?
Or am I confused?
> Again, assuming the technical focus will be worked
out
> separately, I wanted to highlight some of what I've
been
> thinking about and then let others add, remove, clarify,
etc.
> My apologies in advance for this format.
> What will we call this? Has this been decided already?
You
> can see the subject line for my vote :-)
Seems reasonable to me. Perhaps a Marketing person would
not find it very sexy. We should run it by Jim Kobielus. What have prior
events of this sort been called?
OK, I will run it by Jim (who is lurking on this thread) and assume that
if anyone else objects they will voice their opinion here and soon :-)
> How will we execute a dry-run?
> Will we meet somewhere centrally and bring our equipment,
> switches, cables, software, etc.?
> This is probably most efficient, but not cheap
> What location is the most effective?
> If we did it on the west coast, for example, could
we have
> one or more vendors provide more of the hardware (one
of us
> should be able to do that :-) Let me go on record as
voting
> for this approach.
> We should probably book a hotel with conference room
large
> enough to "work" in very soon.
> Would we try to do this over the internet and avoid
the travel?
> At first thought this seemed more economical, but now
seems
> likely to be:
> more expensive
> more time-consuming
> less helpful for what we have to execute at Catalyst
We still favor the Internet approach, perhaps each of
us working to acheive interoperability with one other vendor at a time.
If not, perhaps we could have an east coast and a west dry run. A number
of us are here in the Boston area. Seems like it would be better to hold
it in a lab at a company if possible for better access to power, phone
lines, etc.
My only concern with the internet approach is that it may be slower. I
like the idea of a dry run on each coast. Those that wanted to participate
in both could. I also like the idea of holding it in a companies lab. I
will look into whether our lab could be used on the west coast, but the
rest of you should do the same.
As far as equipment, we need to distinguish between end
systems, which I assume each vendor will provide and network equipment
which could be as little as a couple of ethernet switches.
Would anyone want to volunteer to create a strawman of what they think
the overall demo diagram might look like? We have 13 vendors participating.
So, does that mean we want this to look like 13 separate "companies" each
implementing a different product? I would assume that to be the case and
that we will need firewall's, etc. However, do we really even need an internet
connection to make this work? Clearly having one makes the demo more realistic
to viewers, but technically it seems like a bell or whistle.
> How soon do we need to have the dry-run?
> Catalyst runs from July 15-17 (actually the
> registration/dinner is July 14th and not to be missed
if you
> haven't attended before - this is my 6th one :-)
> Our "hospitality suite" where the demo will occur is
Monday, July 15
> We will want time to regroup after the dry-run and
"fix" things.
> Should we shoot for end of May? Middle of June? I'd
prefer
> the former.
Mid June seems more realistic. However, if we do it over
the net, the testing can stretch out for 6 weeks or more.
How would testing over the net occur?
Let me make a specific counter proposal:
Technical specifications to be agreed upon by May 15.
At least.
Bilateral testing to begin as soon as any two vendors
are ready.
How many vendors would each have to test against to insure for themselves
that they are "interoperable"? Does the transitive property of equality
apply (if a=b and b=c, then a=c)? :-) I agree that testing should begin
any time, but was worried also that individual testing might cause someone
to feel left out. I guess I was thinking that size of organization would
only matter in terms of being able to help out more (you can tell I'm fairly
new to Sun :-)
[Optional] Regional dry runs at companies or hotel suite
during June.
Everybody arrive in SF by July 8 for setup and interop
testing in a hotel suite.
I actually like this idea of arriving early, though it makes for a long
week. The only negative is that if you find any major issues that need
to be dealt with, it might be difficult to do it away from "home" and in
time for the real demo. I'll confess to being a half-empty kind of guy.
What do the rest of you think?
Move the setup to the Catalyst site when available (7/13
or 7/14).
(It is easier for me to send a team to the west coast
a few days early than to do two separate trips.)
I understand this. I was hoping to send a smaller team to the dry run.
That may also be wishful thinking.
> At Catalyst
> We can have access to the suite for setup on Saturday.
I am
> currently planning to arrive Friday night just in case
I can
> be of any help and also to make sure that we are ready
to
> begin the setup activity on Saturday morning. The suite
will
> have internet hookup, but nothing else will be provided.
> We really need to be ready to go (imho) by Sunday afternoon,
> but I am hopeful that Saturday evening is a possibility.
Much
> will depend on how well the dry-run goes and how much
stays
> the same :-)
I think the best demo net is an isolated switch. That
minimizes the extraneous variables. Internet access will be needed only
for downloads.
Ah, didn't understand this at first, but I can now see I was just agreeing
with you :D
> During the day, actually in the morning, on Monday,
July 15
> we will be required to provide a briefing and demo
for the press.
> During the evening on Monday, July 15 we will open
the suite
> to Catalyst attendees for demos and briefing.
> Details for how the demos will be done is something
we need
> to discus. We definitely need a vision here, followed
by a
> well written script. This could be one of the most
difficult
> issues to address and may be the most key.
Once we agree on the technical specifications, this should
not be too hard.
Not hard maybe, but real important. I also think this is probably the biggest
area where we will need to be on the "same team". Again, if someone wanted
to start to create a strawman, based on their own experience with something
similar, that would be great.
> On Tuesday during a general session, one of the SAML
TC
> co-chairs, Jeff Hodges or Joe Pato, will provide a
SAML
> report, including a "post mortem" on the previous day's
activities.
I've asked Jeff if they know who is speaking and the decision has still
not been made yet, not that it is pertinent to our effort.
> Marketing
> We will want to have some kind of marketing done on
this
> prior to Catalyst. The sooner the better. I am not
aware of
> any plans, but that doesn't mean there aren't any.
> I talked to Jim Kobielus at Burton, who is our interface
and
> he will help. I actually think it is very important
that they
> assist a lot here, but again, just my thoughts. I told
him we
> should begin to "hype" this onsite at registration
and during
> the dinner on Sunday.
I would hope they would "hype" it in advance of the show.
Perhaps they could put something on the web page.
Yes, I'll talk with Jim about this as well. I think OASIS should also do
some "hyping" on their web site.
> We will need to create collateral specifically for this
> event, but what? At a minimum we need:
> A printed handout that gives an overview of SAML (with
links
> to more detail), shows who is participating and
> diagrams/describes exactly what is being demonstrated
(order
> to be determined)
> Graphic visual-aids for the walls in the suite. This
could
> include a banner, blow ups of the diagrams, etc.
> We need to agree on the size and format for the signage
to be
> used by each company and should probably discuss how
and
> where this is to be placed.
> What have similar Interop events done? Are they comparible?
> Can we leverage any of what they did? Should we avoid
> something they did? I've taken the liberty to ask Jim
to
> research this and provide his thoughts.
I think each participating vendor should identify a marketing
contact to work on this stuff in parallel to the technical work.
This is a good idea, but if one organization had a marketing person to
put forth some well thought out ideas it might save a lot of effort? Anyone?
I'll definitely talk to our people.
> If we can show that SAML is very real in products that
will
> soon be shipping (or already are) AND have all vendors
feel
> good about their participation, we will have been very
successful.
Agreed.
> I am sure that all of you will be able to add to this
list
> and maybe even point out why some of these issues aren't
big (or
> are even bigger). Whatever the case, let's try to build
a
> fairly succinct list of issues/discussion points. Then
let's get on a
> conference call and try to make decisions on some and
divide
> and conquer the rest. For those issues it becomes clear
can't be
> solved on the phone or which require more investigation,
we
> can assign an individual or individuals to develop
a
> strawman, discuss via email and if necessary have another
con call.
> This email is only my attempt to move us forward. If
there is
> a better way or if somehow this is already going on
and I'm
> just not aware, please point me in the right direction.
Thanks.
> If you've been waiting for a fire to be lit under this
> effort, please consider this email the match :-)
> Don;
I don't see any way to deal with these issues other than
attacking then one at a time.
Hal
Attachment:
don.bowen.vcf
Description: Card for Don Bowen
