Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

shibboleth-dev - Re: [Shib-Users] [SURVEY] Different IdP Packaging

Subject: Shibboleth Developers

List archive

Re: [Shib-Users] [SURVEY] Different IdP Packaging


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Peter Schober <>
  • To: Shibboleth Users <>, Shibboleth Development <>
  • Subject: Re: [Shib-Users] [SURVEY] Different IdP Packaging
  • Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:29:37 +0200
  • Organization: Vienna University Computer Center

* Chad La Joie
<>
[2009-09-22 07:37]:
> My thinking for a while has been that we should move to a model
> where the IdP is a standalone application. That is, it would
> require that Java be installed but otherwise would be fully
> self-contained.
>
> Do you agree with this?
>
> If this were the *only* distribution (i.e. no more WAR) would this be a
> problem for you?

Personally I wouldn't miss Tomcat and only use it because I have to.
Would that standalone app include an AJP connector or would that mean
no httpd as well? To bind to tcp/443 the JVM would need to run as
root or alternativly require iptables juggling, which won't make
support any easier).
I'm doing all I can in httpd but I'm not even sure I'm married to
that either, since we're now offloading SSL to the loadbalancing
appliance, and mod_proxy_ajp can also be a bit of a nuisance.
I have an SP as a landing page in / though, so that might require a
few changes.
-peter



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page