[higgins-dev] H3 deployment configuration issues

["Paul Trevithick" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Two Higgins identity agents (as well as the Higgins IdP/STS, and a Higgins
RP test site) will be involved in the Catalyst interop demo (approx 25-27 of
June). One of the agents uses the H3 configuration. And it has problems.

To help discuss the problems, I've created new & improved documentation here
[1] for both agents. Notice the new deployment configuration summary table
near the top. Please review the details of described [3](H3=java) and
[4](H4=native). I have also updated the Architecture page [2] to split the
RPPS into two separate components (this reflects reality). I have also
annotated some interconnections with the H1, H2, etc. deployment
configurations to which they belong. 

Andy and others at Novell have been focusing on the H4 configuration,
whereas Mike and Abhi of IBM, and Valery, Maxim and SergeyY of Parity
Ukraine, have been focusing on H3. 

H3 and H4 differ from each other in two ways. First, H3 is interpreted
(java) whereas H4 runs native code. Second, H4 embeds the UI (ISS Client UI)
within the native executable, whereas H3 relies on the UI integrated within
HBX itself. 

I have drawn here [2] a line from HBX directly to the RPPS Core. This is the
intent, and the subject of this email, but NOT how it works today. Today HBX
makes SOAP calls to the RPPS Webapp (much like H1). 

As I understand it, there are two problems with HBX's use of SOAP to connect
to RPPS Webapp (vs. some alternative way to connect to RPPS Core): 

1) The size of the code. The presumption is that if we find some other way
for HBX to talk to RPPS that the size would be reduced because several
SOAP/XML-related libraries could be eliminated.

2) The installation and run-time complexity: A separate java process must be
installed and be running at all times.

Soo.....We need to find and evaluate architectural alternatives to address
these issues. Anyone have experience with javascript-to-java bridges?
Should/could the Higgins code run as a java applet!? Can we just address the
installation and run-time issues with fancy installers and live with the OS
background process requirement? 

Anyone with ideas about how to solve these issues, please join the #higgins
IRC channel tomorrow from 10-12am ET (9-11am CT). 

-Paul

[1] http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Deployments
[2] http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Architecture 
[2]
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Deployments#H3_Identity_Agent_.28100.25_lo
cal:_HBX_launches_java_application_.28JVM_required.29.29 
[3]
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Deployments#H4_Identity_Agent_.28100.25_lo
cal:_HBX_launches_native_code.29 

PS: the H4 configuration Novell uses doesn't have these issues because it
can simply have HBX (or equiv) launch an executable. This approach works for
H4 because...
- there is effectively only one method "getDI" (aka "getToken") that needs
to be supported. Thus all of Higgins can be wrapped up as a single
executable with a single entry point ("main()") and command line arguments.
This works because the UI is contained in the executable NOT in the browser
extension.
- Higgins running in native code is fast enough that it can be launched
every time it is needed without appearing sluggish.

PPS: In the short term (for H4) we can use the perpetual motion add-on to
launch the executable, and in the long term we'll include this "launch"
functionality within HBX