I really haven't thought about features for that next release because it is addressing all of our needs right now. 

I would say, there is one. If there was a seamless integration between portal and IdentityMinder, then that would help a bit, but I don't see many challenges yet.

I know the product so well I find it easy the way it is right now. And because the Virtual Appliance has combined everything - there was a time when the installation was a little complex. But the Virtual Appliance makes it easy now. You can spin up IDM or Identity Suite in a few hours and it is ready to use.

The key feature I would like to see is close loop remediation, which is in conjunction with CA Identity Governance today. That will be one of the key features, including the mobility features on password self-service, which will be another key feature for us.

I think CA is too heavy and can't do some things out-of-the-box, so I can't tell you that I love Identity Suite, because right now I don't.

Also, everything's a customization, though they say it's not. What was easy to do with Xceedium has now become very difficult following CA's acquisition of them. The model that I see with IdentityMinder, for example, is that they are trying to think of all the things that the people would want to customize, and they make it out-of-the-box. Let's say I want a custom connector, but it's difficult to do that. So we have to go back to CA and get something, as opposed to doing it myself. To fix it, you get a product enhancement, which can take a year.

It's not a horrible solution. You have SiteMinder, which is really good and the best of breed. What's interesting to me is just CA's model where, for example, they've added the secure proxy server which they're calling the application gateway. Everything must come through that, making it a little bit difficult sometimes to use the product. 

Also, when I look at CA's other products, why are they different products? Why, for example, aren't they just part of your SSO product? Why do I have to buy a license for a product when the only use is going to be with SiteMinder?

I would like synchronization when a mapping is added between end points. Currently, the synchronization is not complete. It would be great if this synchronization happened immediately.

Also, some kind of personalization of the user interface, for us as implementors; the possibility of branding.

And more flexibility with the features.

We would like to see more analytics in the solution. Better integration with the strong authentication components from CA that were also acquired during the RFB, but are not yet operating to their full capacity.

We recently implemented it and are still kind of playing around with it. We're still trying to get used to it.

However, although it's a lot easier than some other tools that we've worked with, we always want more training. We had CA provide that for us, but some of the trainers went to quickly and didn't provide enough use-case scenarios for us. We really would have liked for them to slow down a bit.

For SiteMinder it would be nice if they fixed the reporting server- the main issue is that it is connected to the policy server, so if the reporting database goes down the policy server goes down. The solutions for reporting make it difficult in terms of the reporting database, given what that database does. There comes a questions – will it be business-wise smart to have failover for the reporting server? Just for us to have high HA for our setup, I’d require that my reporting server be high HA as well. There should be a different means for us to get our metrics. It shouldn’t be complex.

The documentation can be improved because sometimes we have some technical issues that were not documented and we have to rely on support to solve them. Then there are issues around getting the architecture, it's challenging to get the architecture.

In my opinion, an additional feature that should be included in the next release would be fully vertical mapping for data transformation, which we currently do through a third-party solution.

The connectors for the identity and governance part could use some improvement, by way of adding more areas. They need more development to cover more target applications.