<div dir="ltr">Scott,<div><br></div><div>"Unsupported" meaning that low-level Terracotta DSO support hasn't been implemented for JDK7 and will not be provided. We had patiently been waiting for Terracotta to support JDK 7 (knowning that the DSO mode required for Shibboleth IDP didn't work) and have now realized that it is only implemented in non-DSO mode. DSO mode is being phased out by Terracotta, with a migration path via BigMemory/EHCache being offered.<div>
<br></div><div style>As an FYI, we are making use of the Hungarian U SLO at this point. The stateless client-side storage does sound interesting though. We already have a statefull solution wrapped around the SSO provided by Shibboleth IDP & SP, so stateless isn't necessarily a requirement in our case. As the remainder of our solution is already JDBC-based, it wouldn't be a big reach (at least in our case) to have that as our backing storage for the IDP.</div>
</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Cantor, Scott <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:cantor.2@osu.edu" target="_blank">cantor.2@osu.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On 5/27/13 10:35 AM, "Marc Thornton" <<a href="mailto:marc.thornton@gmail.com">marc.thornton@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
>The current stateful IDP clustering solution requires Terracotta DSO<br>
>(Distributed Shared Objects). Terracotta has ceased development on DSO<br>
>going forward<br>
>(<a href="http://terracotta.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=37129634" target="_blank">http://terracotta.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=37129634</a>),<br>
>which<br>
> means support for JDK 7 and beyond will not be available.<br>
<br>
</div>"Unsupported" meaning it doesn't work and can't be made to work, or<br>
unsupported meaning they don't fix bugs?<br>
<br>
This hasn't been identified as an issue up until now.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
>Are there any plans to migrate the Shibboleth IDP for compatibility with<br>
>either Terracotta's migration path (BigMemory) or an alternative<br>
>clustering solution?<br>
<br>
</div>There were no plans for another 2.x feature release of any kind and we<br>
will not be using Terracotta again, or any technology like it.<br>
<br>
If Terracotta doesn't work with Java 7, then we will have to discuss what<br>
to do about that. The two obvious extensions one can look at are the<br>
memcache one, about which I know nothing, and the SSO cookie login<br>
extension I wrote. It's possible we might have to ship a 2.5 to add one or<br>
both to the core to extend the viability of the code.<br>
<br>
The hoped-for solution for 3.0 will be stateless, client-side storage.<br>
SAML logout is impossible with that model because cookies are much too<br>
size-limited, but there are no plans yet as to what might be provided as<br>
an alternative. Memcache is one possibility but I don't think we can do<br>
that as a project without a committer who has experience with it, so JDBC<br>
using best-effort replication is probably more likely.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
-- Scott<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
--<br>
To unsubscribe from this list send an email to <a href="mailto:users-unsubscribe@shibboleth.net">users-unsubscribe@shibboleth.net</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>