 |
 |
But there are places on a razor thin budget, and things like this throw them off ball acne Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 31, 2014, at 3:32 PM, "Tim McGeary" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > So what's the price point that EZProxy needs to climb to make it more > realistic to put resources into an alternative. At $500/year, I don't even > have to think about justifying it. At 1% (or less) of the cost of position > with little to no prior experience needed, it doesn't make a lot of sense > to invest in an open source alternative, even on a campus that heavily uses > Shibboleth. > > Tim > > >> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Ross Singer <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> Not only that, but it's also expressly designed for the purpose of reverse >> proxying subscription databases in a library environment. There are tons >> of things vendors do that would be incredibly frustrating to get working >> properly in Squid, nginx, or Apache that have already been solved by >> EZProxy. Which is self-fulfilling: vendors then cater to what EZProxy does >> (rather than improving access to their resources). >> >> Art Rhyno used to say that the major thing that was inhibiting the >> widespread adoption of Shibboleth was how simple and cheap EZProxy was. I >> think there is a lot of truth to that. >> >> -Ross. >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Kyle Banerjee <[log in to unmask] >>> wrote: >> >>>> EZproxy is a self-installing statically compiled single binary >> download, >>>> with a built-in administrative interface that makes most common >>>> administrative tasks point-and-click, that works on Linux and Windows >>>> systems, and requires very little in the way of resources to run. It >>> also >>>> has a library of a few hundred vendor stanzas that can be copied and >>> pasted >>>> and work the majority of the time. >>>> >>>> To successfully replace EZproxy in this setting, it would need to be >>>> packaged in such a way that it is equally easy to install and maintain, >>> and >>>> the library of vendor stanzas would need to be developed as apache >> conf.d >>>> files. >>> >>> This. The real gain with EZProxy is that configuring it is crazy easy. >> You >>> just drop it in and run it -- it's feasible for someone with no >> experience >>> in proxying or systems administration to get it operational in a few >>> minutes. That is why I think virtualizing a system that makes accessing >> the >>> more powerful features of EZProxy easy is a good alternative. >>> >>> kyle > > > > -- > Tim McGeary > [log in to unmask] > GTalk/Yahoo/Skype/Twitter: timmcgeary > 484-294-7660 (cell)