shibboleth-dev - RE: Future of the WAYF discussion

Subject: Shibboleth Developers

List archive

RE: Future of the WAYF discussion

From: "Scott Cantor" <>
To: "'Tom Scavo'" <>
Cc: <>
Subject: RE: Future of the WAYF discussion
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 22:56:13 -0400
Organization: The Ohio State University

> Sorry, Scott, I don't understand your response. Let me rephrase.
> There is a cookie of the same name defined in SAML 2.0 (with a
> particular syntax and semantics). Does this cookie as defined in
> Shibboleth have the same syntax and semantics as in SAML 2.0?

The only use of this cookie is in the software, is internal to the SP, and
yes, it has the same format. When you say Shibboleth, you have to specify if
you mean the profile or the Internet2 software. The former defines no such
cookie, which is what I meant.

-- Scott

Future of the WAYF discussion, Chad La Joie, 09/26/2005
- Re: Future of the WAYF discussion, Chad La Joie, 09/26/2005
- Re: Future of the WAYF discussion, Tom Scavo, 09/26/2005
  - RE: Future of the WAYF discussion, Scott Cantor, 09/26/2005
    - Re: Future of the WAYF discussion, Tom Scavo, 09/26/2005
      - RE: Future of the WAYF discussion, Scott Cantor, 09/26/2005
    - RE: Future of the WAYF discussion, Scott Cantor, 09/26/2005
- Re: Future of the WAYF discussion, Spencer W. Thomas, 09/27/2005
  - Re: Future of the WAYF discussion, Steven_Carmody, 09/27/2005
    - Re: Future of the WAYF discussion, Chad La Joie, 09/27/2005
    - Re: Future of the WAYF discussion, Rod Widdowson, 09/27/2005
      - RE: Future of the WAYF discussion, Scott Cantor, 09/27/2005
        
        RE: Future of the WAYF discussion, Steven_Carmody, 09/28/2005
      - Re: Future of the WAYF discussion, Thomas Lenggenhager, 09/28/2005
        
        Re: Future of the WAYF discussion, Chad La Joie, 09/28/2005
        
        Re: Future of the WAYF discussion, Thomas Lenggenhager, 09/29/2005

List archive

RE: Future of the WAYF discussion