On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Marvin Addison <[email protected]> wrote: >> I therefore strongly feel the default TGT expiration policy should include a >> hard timeout. CAS adopters should have to customize if they want to opt >> out of a hard timeout > > +1 > >> It could just be TicketExpirationPolicyImpl, with properties for >> * number of allowed uses (-1 means infinite) >> * sliding window time length >> * fixed window time length >> * frequency of use throttle time length > > With reasonable defaults and the ability to make any of the time spans > infinite with a -1 value, I'd be fully behind your proposal to make > this the default policy for TGTs. I could go either way on the > recommendation to replace existing policies with this one. They're > already developed and tested -- why get rid of them?
If they are superseded by the approach, deprecating/removing them overtime reduces the code/docs maintenance burden and reduces configuration complexity. > > On the matter of naming, there's simply no use case for throttling > with ST expiration policy since the number of uses should be small > enough to prevent abuse. Keeping TGT in the name is one way to > indicate this, but I do like the idea of improving the brevity of our > component names. > > --1 for the use of Impl in any component names. Don't even touch that > -- it merits it own thread on a slow day. > > M > > -- > You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [email protected] > To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see > http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-dev > -- You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [email protected] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-dev
