SUNET/openid4v - ??

SUNET/satosa-idpy - frontend - becomes part of SATOSA

SUNET/satosa-openid4vci - extension to proxy - becomes MR under SATOSA

SUNET/fedservice - under idpy

SUNET/idpy-sdjwt - under idpy

The issue and Enrique's notes on it can be found here: https://github.com/IdentityPython/pyFF/issues/289

The way things are now, the entity in the first federation would be overwritten by the one in the second federation.

We may want to merge different entity categories, which may differ from one federation to another.

For filtering in mdq, we would need the attributes, which could have different values in different federations, to be merged.

Enrique's PR was merged to allow select pipe to be able to produce a list of entities with duplicates. But the overwriting happens before the select pipe - it happens in the load pipe - all the entities from all the sources are squashed into one dictionary, keyed by entity id.

One idea would be to keep the entities keyed not only by entity id but also by metadata service in the load pipe, but there is some concern that this could introduce problems. When the user requests an entity id, how would we know which one to choose? Could this be handled in the MDQ service? Would the rest of the attributes give a fairly good heuristic to distinguish between those cases? The select pipe can default to doing it the way things currently work - overwriting the first with the second - or use a heuristic downstream to either merge the duplicated entities or keep them separate since they are different. Mikael warns that we need to be careful not to change the default heuristic - otherwise we might break all federations. A new heuristic would need to be approved for each aggregator. We need to better define what happens when we get conflicts so someone will be notified, instead of just getting the last loaded. We will need a feature flag so we don't break deployments.

Ivan wants to establish if this a current problem, or if we are trying to think ahead to a potential problem, especially in the case where the entity ids are the same in two different federations but the actual entities are different. We should document that we make the assumption that there will not be different entities in different federations that will have the same entity id. However, If they are the same entity but in different federations, there is an issue with the entity exposing different things in each federation.

Merging multi-value attributes: What if there is an entity with an entity category in InCommon (say, "hide from discovery") that is not available when that same entity is in eduGain? If we merge them, something that was not intentional would happen. Need to examine these things more thoughtfully before doing merging - some are based on policy.

will create an MR around a request for an improvement