Federated Directory Service (Federated Organization Registry + Federated Service White Pages + X)

1. Federated Directory Service(Federated Organization Registry + Federated Service White Pages + X) Brief Profile Proposal for 2008/09 presented to the IT Infrastructure Planning Committee A. Kassner (IHE-D), J. Caumanns (eCR) 08 October 2008

2. The Problem • Problem addressed • In many countries there are no central registries/directories that contain data to identify and characterize medical organizations, services, ... (entities) • This results in manifold problems: identification, authorization, verification of authenticity, ... • Example – Organization: If privacy regulations require that access rights are granted for sub divisions of hospitals identity data and credentials of these divisions must be available • IHE Profile gaps/overlaps • PWP is focussed on the internal provisioning of employee data • recently no IHE solution for a federation and distributed management of directories • Market readiness • During the roll-out of the eCR in Germany the lack of a standardized solution which copes well with the ITI profiles has been identified by industry and hospitals as the #1 practical problem in setting up and linking regional healthcare networks • Risks of not taking activities now: • Not defining a profile now will result in incompatible implementations and hinder the definition of any authorization solution for XDS which is a MUST for European users.

3. Use Case Organization • A patient has a need for an impatient treatment. Using directory query functionality the referring physician can retrieve the contact data of the hospitals in the nearer environment that offer the desired surgery. • A patient has to be referred from one hospital to another. For a secure transmission of the patient’s medical data a verifier for the credentials of the requested department at the target hospital has to be retrieved. • A patient wants to assign a resident practice access rights to his medical record. To do this the provider of this record has to assign certain access rules to the OID of the resident practice. Service • A resident physician is willing to place a lab result into the patients XDS record which is hosted by a certain hospital. How does he get the URL of the registry? How can he verify that the repository is trustworthy?

4. Proposed Standards & Systems • The proposed profile should use existing directory standards (i. e. LDAP) • RFC 2798 is a good basis for the registry data set • Entity Identification Service (Service Functional Model Specification) + OMG Spec. • The use of DSML and/or SPML should be considered • Federation and trust establishment/brokerage should be based on the respective WS* standards (e. g. using the recommendations of the HL7 v3 transport specification)

5. Discussion • In a first run only organizations should be considered as entities (approach similar to the one used by EIS). • Level of effort: • medium • Profile Editor: • Ben Kraufmann, Olaf Rode (Fraunhofer ISST, eCR Consortium) • Members from IHE Germany and eCR industry partners