shibboleth-dev - RE: Shibboleth 1.1 compatibility
Subject: Shibboleth Developers
List archive
- From: "Scott Cantor" <>
- To: <>
- Subject: RE: Shibboleth 1.1 compatibility
- Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 11:54:02 -0400
- Organization: The Ohio State University
> In Shib 1.2, a response to a 1.1 attribute request might contain...
>
> <Response xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:protocol"
> xmlns:saml="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:assertion"
> xmlns:samlp="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:protocol"
> InResponseTo="d206a5ba1d50c3afd855dea0b0106cb6">
No chance. That's invalid. You're misreading something.
> In Shib 1.3, this same 1.1 attribute request would receive a
> response with...
>
> <Response xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:protocol"
> xmlns:saml="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:assertion"
> xmlns:samlp="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:protocol"
> InResponseTo="d206a5ba1d50c3afd855dea0b0106cb6"
> IssueInstant="2005-08-29T14:22:57.644Z" MajorVersion="1"
> MinorVersion="1" ResponseID="_3770591ca7cd3d629e838d9a91d19761">
That's more or less what a 1.2 response looks like. Both are SAML 1.1. There
are operational and XML differences in the handling of queries and SAML
attributes, but it doesn't affect that element.
-- Scott
- Shibboleth 1.1 compatibility, Will Norris, 08/29/2005
- RE: Shibboleth 1.1 compatibility, Scott Cantor, 08/29/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.