I have an IT background and some apache proxy experience, and it seems fairly easy - for me. I understand it may not be for libraries with limited IT resources. I am not at all familiar with EZProxy, so I have to ask:
What is it about EZProxy that makes it attractive for those libraries with limited IT resources?
-T
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kyle Banerjee
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 12:14 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] EZProxy changes / alternatives ?
Many good ideas in this thread.
One thing I'd just like to throw out there is that there are some ideas that may be good to distribute in the form of virtual machines and this might be one of them.
Proxying is needed by practically all libraries and takes little in terms of systems resources. But many libraries with limited IT resources would have trouble implementing alternatives to ezproxy -- especially if they have to use authentication features not supported by Apache HTTPD. Even for those who do have enough staff time, it seems kind of nuts to have everyone spending time solving the same problems.
kyle
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 5:43 AM, Ryan Eby <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> There was actually a breakout in 2011? Code4lib discussing Apache and
> using it as a proxy. I believe Terry Reese and Jeremy Frumkin, then
> from Oregon?, were the ones leading it. There was lots of interest but
> I'm not sure if anything took off or if they have documentation
> somewhere of how far they got. I remember it being about getting
> something a consortia of libraries could use together so may have been
> more complex requirements than what is looked for here.
>
>
> http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/Can_we_hack_on_this:_Open_Extensibl
> e_Proxy:_going_beyond_EZProxy%3F
>
> --
> Ryan Eby
>
|
