Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

mace-opensaml-users - Re: SAML1.x or SAML2.x?

Subject: OpenSAML user discussion

List archive

Re: SAML1.x or SAML2.x?


Chronological Thread 
  • From: "Tom Scavo" <>
  • To: "Pantvaidya, Vishwajit" <>
  • Cc:
  • Subject: Re: SAML1.x or SAML2.x?
  • Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 15:48:23 -0400
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=VYZFHjf1EOZdy3cKg1ZaQEvyzxLVDQJtTdzatHXHKZ2a+yqWkL6MMxdQD1TQIAHm30wUQewWmkM2K5r7W4muLYUzOvxmpqbJpbE6MQp4qoNccr0C4X04+SPxLWm8QnNJODa9rkSW8Q0uDgM/9SIP8t+6Iv+OT8MGUhLni2GVwzM=
On 4/21/06, Pantvaidya, Vishwajit
<>
wrote:
>
> Meanwhile I see that there is another open source toolkit from sourceid.
> Seems to be just SAML1.1 (i.e. probably does not have the value added
> scenarios as Shibboleth). Was also thinking of taking a look at it. However,
> they seem to have their own "open source" license - so I will need to verify
> that it is acceptable.

Here is a pointer to Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About SAML
Toolkits and Implementations:

https://mail.internet2.edu/wws/arc/shibboleth-dev/2005-04/msg00090.html

Hope this helps,
Tom

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page