I guess one of
the most important questions is whether this should be an
extension of the Attribute mapper (as we propose) or if it would make
more sense to have this as a microservice ? The attribute mapper
extension approach seems simple and non intrusive, yet we do acknowledge
that is has some limitations:
- One cannot perform transformations when using SATOSA in a X to X
proxy setup.
- The mappings/transformations are not ordered so there is no way to
know that a transformation has happened already so that the result can
be used in another one.
Right - I actually think a microservice is better for this reason. I'm
also wondering if the attributemapper itself could not be broken out as
a microservice? That would seem like cleaner architecture
+1
I support the extension as proposed but also think it would ultimately be
more useful and flexible as a microservice.
Thanks,
Scott K