Per-Entity Metadata Working Group

["Cantor, Scott" <>]

On 8/5/16 9:01 AM, Tom Mitchell wrote:
> From a marketing standpoint, if you will, using phrases like
> “significant work” will kill MDQ. Even a hint that InCommon IdPs and SPs
> should consider standing up their own cache/proxy/container/vm to
> participate in MDQ will also doom the initiative.

Could not agree more. If you will, this is like saying I have to handle
DNS for somebody else's domain, not my own.

> Given some number of sign ons per day, and assuming
> some reasonable cache lifetime in memory, with no restarts, perhaps we
> could figure out how many hits per hour/minute/second an MDQ
> infrastructure would need to handle to fulfill the needs of InCommon’s
> 434 identity providers and 3,107 service providers.

The tricky part is that you need to know how many different SPs or IdPs
a peer is connecting with, because hitting the same one over and over
just hits the cache. For example, I can cull logs and find out how many
different IdPs log into my services, though of course it would be a hell
of a lot easier if I customize the SP logging format first.

The MDQ load isn't based on your load, but the heterogeneity of your
load. Does that make sense?

-- Scott