Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

shibboleth-dev - Re: wrt user entry of a pointer to their IDP ..or.. "invisible SSO"

Subject: Shibboleth Developers

List archive

Re: wrt user entry of a pointer to their IDP ..or.. "invisible SSO"


Chronological Thread 
  • From: "Tom Scavo" <>
  • To:
  • Subject: Re: wrt user entry of a pointer to their IDP ..or.. "invisible SSO"
  • Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 18:50:27 -0400
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=MEAVlJa7yWquAXBacXuDDp5+KQo3aDKpdxwOanAi51HDukknbH8XbhnZ+5vXUOVaN6BhxPBbn6yTuEZPnFCmLNTml98FnbQ2kpKx8zHCuCQ0UjXNjAaRi6F4FArVoatf6mgjrcMuBLSxfQ4DekUQjD+DjeN2iD3Cm/m4azuwFtk=
On 9/19/07, Scott Cantor
<>
wrote:
> > What about the SAML V2.0 Identity Provider Discovery Profile? (The
> > IdPDP came from Liberty, did it not?) One idea is to implement a
> > Common Domain as an IdP Proxy (another Liberty concept, right?). Has
> > anybody tried this, do you know?
>
> Yes, that's a WAYF. It doesn't have to be an IdP, it just has to proxy
> requests.

But since the response doesn't come back through the WAYF, it can't
implement the IdPDP. Thus the WAYF is not a Common Domain. Am I
missing something?

Tom

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page