I'm responding to the list since I think sharing this information is valuable.
> 1) Organization currently supports both CAS and Shib. (y/n) Y > 2) Organization has stopped new CAS deployments in favor of > direct Shib connections to SP going forward. (y/n) N > 3) Organization only has Shib to support external federation and > uses CAS for everything internal to the organization. (y/n) N. We _prefer_ CAS for internal authn/authz and Shib for external authn/authz, but don't require such a delineation. In many cases, service provider support for one or the other drives integration decisions. > 4) Organization has CASified a Shib IdP. (y/n) N. We have discussed it, but don't currently have a use case so haven't pursued it. Regards, Marvin Addison Middleware Services Virginia Tech -- 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-user
