Shibboleth Developers

["RL 'Bob' Morgan" <>]

> > I think the plan for 1.0.1 is to just include it in the main
> > shib tarball.  Indeed, I think Scott made it the default
> > configuration.
>
> Yes, that's correct. I think the only reason we wouldn't would be
> because it then requires changing the config file if you don't build the
> source with mysql enabled, but I can do it either way.

Hmm.  I guess this gets to our previous discussion, whenever that was,
about the expected configurations of deployers.  Eg, do we write stuff up
and prepare defaults etc with the expectation that HS and AA will be on
different (replicated) boxes (which I think should happen soon, though I
wouldn't delay 1.0.1 for it).

I think we have to be careful about dependencies on both target and
origin.  I don't think anyone would call Shib easy to install, and while
we can explain why, getting a rep as a time sink can be a bad thing.

So the question (IMHO) with mysql is:  is it likely enough to be of value
to most targets that it's worth the pain of getting it to work or
switching to some other method.  My feeling is that the average target
won't need stored-on-disk session info (how many have it now?), and would
find a mysql dependency just another bump to get over.  Sites that need
the additional robustness it provides will be motivated to configure it
in, since by definition they're bigger sites and it will be worth the
time. I could easily be wrong about both the need for this feature and the
difficulty of supporting it.  But I do think we have to worry about each
new dependency.

 - RL "Bob"


------------------------------------------------------mace-shib-design-+
For list utilities, archives, subscribe, unsubscribe, etc. please visit the
ListProc web interface at 

    http://archives.internet2.edu/

------------------------------------------------------mace-shib-design--