testing errors

[Kevin Foote]

> On Jan 17, 2018, at 11:21, Tom Scavo <trscavo at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> tl;dr Since the combined deployment footprint for the IdP + SP is
> substantial, TestShib makes it easier for deployers to get started (as
> evidenced by its popularity). That said, for the most part TestShib is
> a missed opportunity to reinforce the methods of trusted metadata
> exchange.

Tom, 

I’ve been silent for this discussion thus far.. 

A little bit about the metadata though.
The aggregate has never been and never was for dissemination to those who use TS rather it was built for internal consumption by the services themselves.
The SP was for the longest time using the Dir MD provider. With the increase of MD fragments being placed on the service (100 to 200 per week) this became 
unmanageable by the SP and would not scale. Thus the aggregate was born. I based the aggregate on pyFF - maybe a bad decision in the long run however, this 
was the easiest way at the time to get an aggregate out of the horrendous mess of MD that we get to process. 

Going forward I do have plans to revamp the MD intake / aggregate process.. mainly being spurred on by the last python update borking pyFF for good.

Anyway.. thats my 2 cents input / background.


--------
thanks
 kevin.foote