Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

shibboleth-dev - Re: comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-02

Subject: Shibboleth Developers

List archive

Re: comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-02


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Tom Scavo <>
  • To: Scott Cantor <>
  • Cc:
  • Subject: Re: comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-02
  • Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 11:46:51 -0500
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=P8NaLcn4prkcEbYZas838puY/ZGVLo7a92RAFOozVPi2aYnMSaxzLQrKqRGG5WgQTdQHVNTkwcQpOxYeGoN9IaUTwZiI2fpcMa4sdnoWzLzbClOwhrv1AuwFZ43+mCq3aEh8DZk6P36N8j7kPZY2F8SNBtAp6ppkihoSSeGFw7c=
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 15:24:31 -0400, Scott Cantor
<>
wrote:
>
> > - Applicable Shibboleth version is not mentioned anywhere in this
> > document (intentionally, I presume, but it's still a significant
> > omission)
>
> Intentional. There's an unpublished conformance doc, and there are no
> implementations of Shibboleth that are conformant. This is not about
> implementation, so why should we mention one?

Sorry, I meant *specification* version. Are we at V6 Draft? (Why has
the spec never left draft mode?)

Cheers,
Tom

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page