Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

edugain-discuss - Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] ALL eduGAIN entities in UK federation?

edugain-discuss AT lists.geant.org

Subject: An open discussion list for topics related to the eduGAIN interfederation service.

List archive

Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] ALL eduGAIN entities in UK federation?


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Peter Schober <peter.schober AT univie.ac.at>
  • To: edugain-discuss AT geant.net
  • Subject: Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] ALL eduGAIN entities in UK federation?
  • Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 18:07:07 +0100
  • Authentication-results: prod-mail.geant.net (amavisd-new); dkim=pass header.i= AT univie.ac.at
  • List-archive: <https://mail.geant.net/mailman/private/edugain-discuss/>
  • List-id: eduGAIN discussion list <edugain-discuss.geant.net>
  • Organization: ACOnet

* Jan Tomášek <jan.tomasek AT cesnet.cz> [2014-02-05 17:37]:
> And, is anywhere a list of national federations which are reasonably
> broken? ;)

I /think/ UKf and SWAMID are the only ones currently mixing in
interfederation entities with their existing respective aggregates.

I planned to do precicely that, too, but decided otherwise in the
end. In part to avoid "surprising" outcome like this, even though
others knew to "expect" this; in part because of all the things you
should (re-)consider when (inter-)federating changing the metadata URL
seemed the least problematic/difficult to me; in part because of the
general reluctance I see in .at to join interfederation efforts,
meaning I don't expect to export a significant percentage of our
entities to eduGAIN anytime soon, and probably never for a 100% export
(the UKf aim, AFAIU).
But then again, the UKf has 20 times our number of entities to take
care of. I guess that does change your view on what's achievable (and
what "short term" means).
-peter





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

Top of Page