Implementing MACE Grouper at Brown University James Cramton October 9, 2007 Internet2 Fall Member Meeting 2007 San Diego, CA.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
S&I Framework Provider Directories Initiative esMD Work Group October 19, 2011.
Advertisements

LOTUS to SharePoint Migration Services. © 2010 Star Knowledge Technology Team Alliance 2 Key Discussion Points Star Knowledge Value Proposition Microsoft.
CCMDB 7.2.
PERFORMANCE FOR ALL The Project & the System. A HE project co-ordinated by University of Bristol, open to HE internationally. Developing the requirements.
Keith Wiles DPACC vNF Overview and Proposed methods Keith Wiles – v0.5.
What is workflow?  A workflow is a structured way of defining and automating structures and procedures within an organization. What is workflow management.
Introduction to Software Testing
Enhancing Collaboration by Extending the Groups Directory Infrastructure James Cramton Brown University.
Brown University MACE Grouper at Brown University James Cramton March 12, 2008 Copyright © James Cramton 2008 This work is the intellectual property of.
Trusted IT Group. The challenge: 40 active, concurrent IT projects  Unsatisfactory Project Delivery.
A Model for Enterprise Group and Affiliation Management RL “Bob” Morgan University of Washington CAMP, June 2005.
Effective Methods for Software and Systems Integration
SOA – Development Organization Yogish Pai. 2 IT organization are structured to meet the business needs LOB-IT Aligned to a particular business unit for.
ENTERPRISE DATA INTEGRATION APPLICATION ARCHITECTURE COMMITTEE OCTOBER 8, Year Strategic Initiatives.
BMC Software confidential. BMC Performance Manager Will Brown.
Authorization Scenarios with Signet RL “Bob” Morgan University of Washington Internet2 Member Meeting, September 2004.
WP3 Semivirtual Campus Progress Report Petr Grygarek VSB-CZ.
DuraCloud Managing durable data in the cloud Michele Kimpton, Director DuraSpace.
Evolution to CIMI Charles (Cal) Loomis & Mohammed Airaj LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3 29 August 2013.
RUP Fundamentals - Instructor Notes
1 Chapter 11 Implementation. 2 System implementation issues Acquisition techniques Site implementation tools Content management and updating System changeover.
I2/NMI Update: Signet, Grouper, & GridShib Tom Barton University of Chicago.
Global Customer Partnership Council Forum | 2008 | November 18 1IBM - GCPC MeetingIBM - GCPC Meeting IBM Lotus® Sametime® Meeting Server Deployment and.
Bboogle: Updates and Experience Patricia Goldweic, Sr. Software Engineer, Northwestern University Brian Nielsen, Project Manager, Faculty Initiatives,
Group Management at Brown James Cramton Brown University April 24, 2007.
Access Management with Grouper Tom Barton University of Chicago.
Enhancing OSP for Programmatic and Institutional Assessment Lynn Ward and John Gosney Indiana University.
Penn Groups PennGroups Central Authorization System June 2009.
Records Registration Management System The HOB Capstone Project.
INFO 425 Week 21 INFO 425 Design Problem I Week 2 – SRS Improvements Glenn Booker.
Clarity Educational Community Configuration Releases Best Practices in the CA PPM Development Process Presented by: Brian Wuenstel.
UCLA Enterprise Directory Identity Management Infrastructure UC Enrollment Service Technical Conference October 16, 2007 Ying Ma
Riva Managed Identity Integration for Active Directory and Novell ® GroupWise ® Aldo Zanoni CEO, Managing Director Omni Technology Solutions
Training Role Module 8 – User Admin Ver. 10 Oct 2009.
Brown University Infrastructure Support for Teaching and Learning Applications at Brown University John Spadaro Sept. 24, 2008.
The Systems Development Life Cycle
Planning a Microsoft Windows 2000 Administrative Structure Designing default administrative group membership Designing custom administrative groups local.
Microsoft Office Project 2003: Selling EPM in your Organization Matt Wilson Business Solutions Specialist LMR Solutions.
Kuali Rice A basic overview…. Kuali Rice Mission First and foremost to provide a consistent development framework and common middleware layer for Kuali.
Implementing Sakai at Your Institution. 2 Small-scale Sakai at Boston University.
Grouper at Duke Klara Jelinkova, Duke University Shilen Patel, Duke University Internet 2 Fall Meeting San Diego 2007.
Windows Role-Based Access Control Longhorn Update
1 Microsoft Project Solution Offerings and the next chapter of EPM September 17th, 2003 Brendan Giles, PMP Systemgroup Management Services.
Feedback from the POOL Project User Feedback from the POOL Project Dirk Düllmann, LCG-POOL LCG Application Area Internal Review October 2003.
Remote Access Portal Project Ben Dawson Larry Finn Peter Stickney Ken Vedaa May 7, GC.
1 June 10-15, 2012 Growing Community; Growing Possibilities Switching to on-line evaluations for courses at UC Berkeley Daphne Ogle, Lead Design, UC Berkeley.
A Comprehensive WebCT Integration System Rob Phillips –Teaching and Learning Centre, Murdoch University James Strong –NetSpot Onno Benschop –ITmaze Mark.
Grouper Tom Barton University of Chicago. I2MM Spring Outline  Grouper’s place in the world  Some Grouper guts  Deployment scenarios.
SharePoint Administrative Communications Planning: Dynamic User Notifications for Upgrades, Migrations, Testing, … PRESENTED BY ROBERT FREEMAN (
RUP Deployment RUP Deployment Workflow
ISC-ASTT PennGroups Central Authorization System (Grouper) June 2009.
FROM MIT KERBEROS TO MICROSOFT ACTIVE DIRECTORY The Pennsylvania State University’s move from a lower case MIT Kerberos realm to a Standard Microsoft Active.
Tivoli © 2010 IBM Corporation CCMDB New Features for CCMDB August 2010.
Current Middleware Picture Tom Barton University of Chicago Tom Barton University of Chicago.
1 SYS366 Week 1 - Lecture 1 Introduction to Systems.
ISIS Project Status Report May 18, 2006 Prepared by MAXIMUS, Inc Education Systems Division for the ABT Committee.
Networks ∙ Services ∙ People Mandeep Saini TNC15, Porto, Portugal Virtual organisation Authorisation Management Practices in Research and.
Introduction to Terra Dotta Applications Integration with Campus Data Systems for institutions beginning their software implementation.
V7 Foundation Series Vignette Education Services.
SAS Curriculum Mapping Trainer (SAS CMT) October 2011.
SteLLLa2.0 Final Meeting, Avignon SMS group. Structured Dialogic Design Process SDDP Face-to-face session in Geel Virtual synchronous online session via.
Introducing Access Management
BIM 360 Glue Migration to BIM 360 Account Administration (HQ)
Overview of Active Directory Domain Services
Simplified Development Toolkit
Provisioning Groups, Memberships, and Permissions to LDAP
Course: Module: Lesson # & Name Instructional Material 1 of 32 Lesson Delivery Mode: Lesson Duration: Document Name: 1. Professional Diploma in ERP Systems.
Transitioning into Prime Pilot Phase & Implementation Phase
Infrastructure Support for Teaching and Learning Applications at Brown University John Spadaro Sept. 24, 2008.
James Cowling Senior Technical Architect
Presentation transcript:

Implementing MACE Grouper at Brown University James Cramton October 9, 2007 Internet2 Fall Member Meeting 2007 San Diego, CA

Project Goals Centralize group definitions Make groups more accessible to apps Delegate group management Improve group management interface Adopt compatible standards Minimize service interruptions Phased rollout of supported apps

Solution Scope 1 year in planning 1 PT developer 1 PT sys admin 3 PT managers 2 months in execution 2 FT developers 1 PT sys admin 3 PT managers Identify measurable benefit to CIS Pilot Instructional Technology applications WebCT course management software Majordomo list manager Confluence wiki iTunes U Limit initial user base to 6 users of the GUI Focus on the well known course group schema

Current Status Production launch at start of Fall semester 2007 Limited to course groups 2,500 ‘real’ courses; 4,500 with independent study 14 groups per section  60,000 course groups Nightly provisioning takes 5 – 8 hours LDAP provisioning takes 1.5 – 2 hours Runs continuously after nightly provisioning Replicates ad-hoc changes in near-time (2 – 4 hours) Corrects minor discrepancies created under load Demographic groups using legacy Brown Grouper

System Diagram AfterBefore

Provisioning Workflow Nightly provisioning batch runs in hours Each step executes via ssh immediately after its predecessors, from a shell script on a one host Batched LDAP provisioning replicates ad-hoc Grouper changes every hours Dependencies on nightly person provisioning can suspend execution

Course Group Schema Course : [ Subject ] : [ Number ] : [ Term ] : [ Section ] All Administrator –Instructor (Provisioned) –TeachingAssistant –Manager Contributor –ContentDeveloper –Mentor Learner –Student (Provisioned) –Auditor –Vagabond [ brackets ] indicate dynamic data Bold indicates eduCourse/IMS compatible role Schema is flattened to provision LDAP 12 groups per course provision hasMember attribute in Groups ou Person objects get isMemberOf pointers to groups

Application Role Mapping Documented how Grouper groups map to application roles Application integration characteristics allow some flexibility Mapping highly dependent on user feedback MACE Grouper Course GroupsiTunesMajordomoConfluenceWebCT All Recipient list, Discussion SenderCan Use AdministratorInstructorBroadcast SenderSpace Admin Instructors (provisioned) Instructor Managers TAs TA and Designer ContributorInstructor Space Admin Content Developers Designer Mentors LearnerStudent Auditors Auditor Students (provisioned, read only) Student Vagabonds Auditor Other, outside MACE GrouperSuper Admin Super Admin(s)

Lessons Learned—Integration Write good documentation 40 pages of concepts, role mapping, plus Grouper and application tasks Test with the most representative data possible Mid-term data not always representative—too little change Beginning of term data causes more change—and longer run time Be prepared for a lengthy support cycle after launch Application ‘support’ for external groups is variable Some integrate directly with LDAP ~ natively (iTunes, Majordomo) Some use separate provisioning scripts (WebCT) Some suffer loss of usability with thousands of groups (Confluence) None pay any attention to group ACLs—use single bind dn Application needs vary by course or group Some need section-specific course groups Some need multi-section course groups Few performance problems in the Grouper UI LDAPpc provisioning needs performance and feature improvements Provisioning LDAP from group attribs would allow more flexibility

Lessons Learned—Group Management Limit initial release audience to manageable, trusted group Demographic groups are a big challenge 10 years of legacy demographic group evolution is a mess Legacy demographic groups have redundancy and transparency problems Can’t clean up part of the legacy data without addressing all groups Demographic group resolution gating factor in deploying apps WebAuth Wifi Bulk Naming conventions take a long time to define Accurately representing existing uses of groups Maintaining standards compatibility (eduCourse/IMS) Catch-all group important in course schema Widespread use will require exposure of implications of actions Lay users will need a clear understanding of how changes impact apps GUI troubleshooting tool awaits in Nirvana

Next Steps Software improvements needed in near term Performance LDAPpc batched performance around 2 hours is too long Provision LDAP using attribs, not stems –Speed: Do not provision 2,000 independent study course groups –Flexibility: Add courses to provisioning process as needed Logging and auditing capabilities need improvement UI needs to be customized for Brown’s needs Off-the-shelf UI is demonstration of all capabilities Collaboration started with other campuses Identify priorities for fall development Other CIS projects Deploy more applications using course groups Delve into demographic groups, AD, NDS migrations (complicated) Support more detailed privilege management (Signet?) Develop tool to expose implications of group and privilege changes

Long Term Vision Identify who manages groups Allow lay people to manage their groups & privileges Must convey implications of group & privilege changes across apps Pursuing idea of a ‘services portal’ to automatically activate selected services for specific groups Both imply more granular control of privileges Message-based provisioning Provide real-time change availability 1. From Grouper to LDAP 2. From HR or course management systems to Grouper Enforcement of group ACLs from within applications Apps should not expose existence or membership of some groups Have yet to see an application support this Probably can be achieved by removing capabilities from apps May require exposure of privilege management to community