Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

mace-opensaml-users - Re: OpenSAML and JRE 1.3

Subject: OpenSAML user discussion

List archive

Re: OpenSAML and JRE 1.3


Chronological Thread 
  • From: "Tom Scavo" <>
  • To:
  • Subject: Re: OpenSAML and JRE 1.3
  • Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:17:51 -0500
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=BEopPhDanqk/gINfnDsZYyO84qoF7hOGPzmotP+082tBKsNFngFV26GCVlg6fdG6mpfuA7nc9jpQm/K+EKFuBy600NmeXSpDD/7TqO2yA/vX+jN3Cf3qe/Bt0ZPGN/7mnZ5QGModeA9vLe5QvwPvmXs/gl7ZBDVTE4qNNooa+6A=

Yes, it appears OpenSAML 1.1 will work with JDK 1.3 (although I
haven't used it with that Java platform):

https://mail.internet2.edu/wws/arc/mace-opensaml-users/2005-07/msg00031.html

This Google search will turn up more information:

site:internet2.edu opensaml jdk 1.3

Hope this helps,
Tom

On 12/13/06, Scott Cantor
<>
wrote:
> I thought OpenSAML 1.1 worked with JDK 1.3 or higher?

To be honest I lost track. I think JAXP 1.3 requires 1.4, but I don't know
anymore. Somebody who knows should probably put up a topic for it.

> > Could you give me a quick idea of how much work would be needed to use
> > OpenSAML with Java 1.3, if it is feasible.

Pretty much "I have no clue" is the only answer I can give. Since that code
is frozen and the new code will NOT support 1.3, I think it would be a very
bad idea for anybody to use it that way.

How dead does a JDK have to be before it's considered bad to rely on it?

> > My needs are pretty much only generating digitally signed SAML v1.1
> > messages.

Chances are good that will hit exactly the functionality that won't work. At
a minimum, you need DOM3 to make the XML ID attributes work or signing won't
work. Whether that's feasible with Java 1.3 I don't know.

-- Scott





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page