Evaluable criteria

[Cantor, Scott]

On 6/1/15, 11:12 PM, "Brent Putman" <putmanb at georgetown.edu> wrote:


>
>I forgot to comment earlier on that specific detail.  I don't know what 
>is being envisioned here, but: doesn't anything involving use of SAML 
>metadata fundamentally assume an entity identifier of some kind?

Not necessarily on the wire. The common case is when you have to reverse 
map from an endpoint, which is the case here.

>OTOH, per the TODO, if you want to support resolution *without* an 
>EntityIdCriterion, that brings up concerns about efficiency.  It might 
>not work well to iterate a large metadata batch of 100's or 1000's of 
>entity descriptors.

Not without secondary indexing, no.

>Along those lines, I have given some thought to the need to support 
>additional indexes on EntityDescriptors besides entityID, hopefully 
>pluggable.  That would in some address this issue - although then the 
>relevant criteria would likely be used as "lookup"
> criteria, rather than as predicates.

Yes, exactly.

You will, for example, have to do this for artifacts. I mentioned that 
numerous times to Chad a while back, you can't do inbound artifact unless 
you index the metadata by SourceID.

-- Scott