Shibboleth Developers

[Jim Fox <>]

> So this sounds like we'd like to place both installation methods(bilateral 
> communication with test providers, and bilateral communication between your 
> IdP/SP pair) on equal footing, but make sure that the test IdP and test SP 
> are available without joining a federation?  If I've interpreted you 
> correctly, I'd support that approach.  Depending on how we implement it, 
> different misconfigurations may be hidden by use of that sort of test 
> provider as well, e.g. a bogus providerId.  It'd be a good way to prevent 
> something like InQueue from happening again, and I'm always in favor of 
> iterative processes that limit the number of possible problems at any point 
> along the way.
>
> I'm just reluctant to see the default become the self-contained bilateral 
> installation, as I think the categories of people you note below capture a 
> significant portion of the people using our installation documentation.

Wouldn't any production IdP have a few bilateral arrangements?  Along
with one or more federation memberships?  That's why the steps of
bilateral and then to federation seems natural to me.  I don't see
how you can have new installers join a federation without that
federation being an inqueue clone.

Jim