Liaison statement
Liaison statement from ITU-T SG 17 to IETF on Technical output of Focus Group on Identity Management (FG IdM)

Submission date 2007-10-19
From ITU-T SG 17 (Xiaoya Yang)
To IETF (Scott Bradne)
Response contact Xiaoya YANG,
Technical contact,,
Purpose For comment
Deadline 2007-12-09 Action Taken
Attachments Liaison on Technical output of Focus Group on Identity Management (FG IdM)
Study Group 17 is pleased to announce that the ITU-T Focus Group on
Identity Management (FG IdM) has produced six deliverables/reports that
document the work that it accomplished in fulfilment of its Terms of
Reference (ToR).
The FG IdM was chartered by ITU-T Study Group 17 in December 2006 and
worked through September 2007.  The FG IdM’s ToR, scope, objectives
and deliverables are available from its web site using
Username: “fgidmuse� and Password “fgidmuse.�
The FG IdM conducted six face-to-face meetings from December 2006 until
September 2007.  In addition, several teleconferences were held that
served as a follow-up for actions items developed at the face-to-face
In an ambitious schedule, the FG IdM was very successful in achieving
its primary goals and objectives. The results of the FG IdM work are
documented in the following freely available reports which can be
downloaded from its web site:
1.	FG IdM Report No.1: Report on Activities Completed and Proposed;
2.	FG IdM Report No.2: Overview Report on the Deliverables;
3.	FG IdM Report No.3: Report on Identity Management Ecosystem and
4.	FG IdM Report No.4: Report on Identity Management Use Cases and Gap
5.	FG IdM Report No.5: Report on Requirements for Global Interoperable
Identity Management;
6.	FG IdM Report No.6: Report on Identity Management Framework for
Global Interoperability.
With the exception of the FG IdM Report No.6, Report on Global
Interoperable IdM Framework, all of the FG IdM reports are considered
completed documents.  Although FG IdM Report No.6 is incomplete, it is
an excellent basis for future work on a generic identity management
framework that supports global harmonization and bridging of disparate
IdM solutions and systems within and external to a network environment.
 Consequently, we plan to continue the development of this framework.
Study Group 17 is using FG IdM Report No.4 as the basis for developing
a new draft Recommendation X.idmgap, and FG IdM Report No.5 as the
basis for a new draft Recommendation X.idmreq.  Study Group 17 will
also continue to up-date the lexicon.  Your comments on this approach
are welcomed and encouraged.
We believe a consistent and structured approach needs to be taken for
IdM related work to support internetworking.  We expect our IdM program
to leverage work being performed by organizations such as yours.  We
will be focusing on IdM as it will be used in
telecommunication/information and communications technologies,
involving topics such as:
•	Provision of credential, identifier, attribute, and pattern
identity services with known assurance levels to all entities;
•	Discovery of authoritative Identify Provider resources, services,
and federations;
•	Interoperability among authorization privilege management
platforms, identity providers and provider federations, including
Identity Bridge Providers;
•	Security and other measures for reduction of identity threats and
risks, including protection of identity resources and personally
identifiable information;
•	Auditing and compliance, including policy enforcement and
protection of personally identifiable information;
•	Usability, Scalability, Performance, Reliability, Availability,
Accounting, Internationalization, and Disaster Recovery.
We encourage you to use the information provided in FG IdM Reports. 
Specifically, we invite you to review and comment on:
1.	The Lexicon in FG IdM Report No.3, to include additional definition
of terms that are needed to support your IdM activities;
2.	The IdM use cases and gaps analysis  in FG IdM Report No.4, to
include providing additional use cases that can be used to derive
requirements in your area of IdM work;
3.	The generic query-response IdM architectural model used as the basis
for the use case gap analysis (Section 5.2 of FG IdM Report No.4) and
the requirements discussion (Section 5.1 of FG IdM Report No.5), to
include suitability of this model to your area of IdM work;
4.	The IdM framework components/services (Section 8.0 of FG IdM Report
No.6), especially the IdM bridging function services (Section 8.14 of
FG IdM Report No.6); and
5.	The NGN Identity Plane concept (Section 6.4.2 of FG IdM Report No.4
and Section 5.1 of FG IdM Report No.5).