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: Leif Johansson <leifj AT sunet.se>
  • To: edugain-discuss AT geant.net
  • Subject: Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] ALL eduGAIN entities in UK federation?
  • Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 19:51:28 +0100
  • List-archive: <https://mail.geant.net/mailman/private/edugain-discuss/>
  • List-id: eduGAIN discussion list <edugain-discuss.geant.net>

On 2014-02-05 16:58, Ian Young wrote:
> On 5 Feb 2014, at 15:30, Thomas Lenggenhager <lenggenhager AT switch.ch> wrote:
>
>> Why not just list on the UKf central DS the native UKf IdPs only?
>>
>> The interfederation enabled SPs will have to reconfigure to use a local
>> DS as UKf anyhow recommends. That would solve the original problem
>> reported here.
> Right, it would make this problem go away at the cost of making it harder
> for people to begin interfederating. Our view has been that reducing the
> friction there has the highest priority, because if we can't make the
> process as smooth as possible then people won't bother. You may be in a
> situation where a different approach is appropriate.

Totaly agree

> Also, to misquote Gretsky, we want to skate to where we hope the puck will
> be, not to where it is now. In the long term, if the default is to be to
> enable inter-federation, having to get everyone to switch over to some new
> thing is not optimal.
>
> Having said which, our systems are flexible enough that we're not locked in
> to the current choices if they become problematic. I don't think that what
> we've seen so far proves the case either way.
>
> -- Ian
>
>
>







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

Top of Page