Defining Use Cases for Federating Library Services

["Dale,Andy" <>]

There are a few places in the diagram that I would like more clarity.
I'm happy to talk this through with you 1-on-1 or in our scheduled call
slot. 

I'm not sure what you mean by " with the move from SAML 
1 to SAML 2, the navigation page can no longer redirect directly to 
the IdP".

In terms of the logical branching "if resource is shib enabled" I find
that these diagrams are most useful when they represent a single flow;
hence I put IPAuth specifically in the name. I would add another diagram
that shows direct Shib access. Then... we add a classic flow diagram
that shows the decision flows but not the details of the interactions. 

-----Original Message-----
From:  [] 
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 8:02 AM
To: 
Subject: RE: [InC-Lib-UseCase] flow diagram, simple EZP use case

At 9:28 AM -0400 10/30/09, Dale,Andy wrote:
>There are bits of this I understand and bits I don't. here's an
>alternate version that may or may not be accurate and you can introduce
>to the larger group or not (at this late stage I would probably not).
>Over the next couple of weeks I would be happy to work with you to
bring
>your domain expertise together with my UML skills.
>

thank you! This is vastly improved!

I did notice one error that I introduced.... with the move from SAML 
1 to SAML 2, the navigation page can no longer redirect directly to 
the IdP.

I also noticed an error that crept in when you translated from my 
initial crude image -- EzProxy can be configured to know which 
resources are Shib-enabled; if the resource is Shib-enabled, it will 
redirect the user straight to the resource, rather than thru the 
proxy portion of EZP....

this is useful because it allows instructors, for instance, to create 
"pseudo-permanent" url's that they include in course home pages; 
these url's won't change if a resource moves from IP-access control 
to Shib-based access control.