mace-opensaml-users - Re: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback
Subject: OpenSAML user discussion
List archive
- From: Tim Freeman <>
- To: "Tom Scavo" <>
- Cc: ,
- Subject: Re: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback
- Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 19:29:14 -0600
On Sun, 5 Mar 2006 19:03:28 -0500
"Tom Scavo"
<>
wrote:
> On 3/2/06, Tom Scavo
> <>
> wrote:
> >
> > (Globus Toolkit is using OpenSAML in other ways, so I'll let someone
> > closer to Globus respond.)
>
> Well, nobody from Globus followed up, so I'll take a stab at it. As
> far as I know, Globus Toolkit's primary use of OpenSAML 1.1 involves
> the AuthorizationDecisionStatement in conjunction with an access
> control technology called Community Authorization Service (CAS). So
> I assume Globus would like support for AuthorizationDecisionStatement
> (SAML 1.1) and AuthzDecisionStatement (SAML 2.0) in OpenSAML 2.0. I'm
> just guessing, but it seems likely that CAS will not be ported to SAML
> 2.0, so of the two, the AuthorizationDecisionStatement would be most
> important.
I'm also curious about this bullet from the original email of this thread:
"Support for loading multiple configuration files was added"
1. Does this mean that multiple configurations can be used simultaneously by
different threads in the same JVM? Or is there a choice made at JVM init?
2. Are all library configurations going to also be available for programmatic
configuration? (in Java 1.1, I think I remember the config files mapped to
System properties).
3. And speaking to both questions: if possible, a model that lets at least
separate classloaders have different configs would be desirable (i.e., avoid
System properties).
I'm not sure how strong the requirement for 3 is with respect to OpenSAML or
how
difficult it would be to code OpenSAML that way. But I do know the GT Java
container will be moving towards more restricted, service-specific contexts
and
thought I'd at least mention the thought.
Thanks,
Tim
- Re: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback, (continued)
- Re: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback, Chad La Joie, 03/03/2006
- Re: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback, Tom Scavo, 03/03/2006
- Re: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback, Chad La Joie, 03/03/2006
- Re: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback, Tom Scavo, 03/02/2006
- RE: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback, Scott Cantor, 03/02/2006
- Re: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback, Tom Scavo, 03/05/2006
- Re: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback, Tim Freeman, 03/05/2006
- RE: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback, Scott Cantor, 03/06/2006
- Re: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback, Tim Freeman, 03/05/2006
- Re: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback, Chad La Joie, 03/06/2006
- Re: 2.0 Status Update & Request for Feedback, Tim Freeman, 03/05/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.