shibboleth-dev - RE: comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-09
Subject: Shibboleth Developers
List archive
- From: "Scott Cantor" <>
- To: "'Tom Scavo'" <>
- Cc: "'Shibboleth Development'" <>
- Subject: RE: comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-09
- Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 16:48:33 -0500
- Organization: The Ohio State University
> > > - In section 3.2.2, what are the requirements (if any) with respect to
> > > <saml:AttributeDesignator> elements?
>
> Okay, I take this to be your answer to the second question, now what
> about the first question?
Meaning the above? Could you suggest what kinds of requirements you'd be
thinking about?
There are no MUSTs I can think of, and the only SHOULD is covered by the
general section on attribute naming where it's suggested that the URI thingy
is the recommended namespace, mostly just to avoid people using that icky
field in weird ways.
I don't think the suggestion that designators be used if possible rises to a
normative SHOULD in this doc either, since we support the empty case in the
manner prescribed by SAML which is to return everything allowed by policy.
-- Scott
- comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-09, Tom Scavo, 04/02/2005
- RE: comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-09, Scott Cantor, 04/02/2005
- Re: comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-09, Tom Scavo, 04/02/2005
- RE: comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-09, Scott Cantor, 04/02/2005
- Re: comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-09, Tom Scavo, 04/02/2005
- RE: comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-09, Scott Cantor, 04/02/2005
- Re: comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-09, Tom Scavo, 04/02/2005
- RE: comments: draft-mace-shibboleth-arch-protocols-09, Scott Cantor, 04/02/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.