On Jan 3, 2014, at 5:02 PM, Brian Warner <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I don't know as much about the tokenserver (design or deployment) as I > should, but if current-Sync is using it, then I imagine that we could > run a single tokenserver that understands both old and new/FxA schemes, > it will have a DB with accounts that are either tied to an (old-sync) > email address or a (new-FxA) account GUID, and then the rest of the Sync > infrastructure can be shared without it even knowing what sort of client > is talking to it. > Current Sync is not using it. We built it to support sync 2 and the various persona plans. What would actually happen is that Old Sync would continue to pass user/pass to the sync server, and New Sync would pass the assertion to the tokenserver, which would give it a token that could be used on the sync server. The sync server would look for a token, and if one was not present, fall back. Of course, we may want to keep them separate for accounting reasons and various other things, but for space efficiency, we could merge if necessary. > My hunch is > that we can make most of the backend protocol improvements we want > within that constraint, but I don't know for sure. That's pretty much what I figured, which is a bit worrying. We'll have to get creative. Toby _______________________________________________ Sync-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/sync-dev
