Andy, I reviewed your document.
I'm reading interop spec date Aug 26. In that
attribute assertion is not queried by subject in a separate step, but
returned
as attribute statement within assertion queried by
the artifact. (I'm not sure why this is done, this is not to the
letter
of profile). Destination site can take this
assertion and include it as evidence in azn query for the target resource. That
would be the only additional action needed after
step 5.
Simon
----- Original Message -----
From:
Andy
Fetterer
To: ''
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 3:36 PM
Subject: FW: [saml-dev] saml interop
participation
Simon
–
I
think that if there are no vendors for CLX to be interoperable with, we’ll
probably proceed with a standalone authz demo (e.g. we show interoperability
with browser / artifact and then use that to construct a SOAP authz request to
an authentication authority). We
seem to have a lack of a.a’s to be interoperable with now. What does OverXeer have in mind? Also, have you reviewed the extensions
to the interop spec?
AUTOTEXTLIST \s "E-mail
Signature"
Andrew
Fetterer
CrossLogix,
Inc.
http://www.crosslogix.com/
-----Original
Message-----
From: Don Bowen
[mailto:]
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 3:24
PM
To: Simon
Godik
Cc:
;
Subject: Re: [saml-dev] saml interop
participation
Simon,
We have made valiant efforts to extend
our SAML Interop demonstration to include more than just browser/artifact
profile. However, given that we needed to have the technical details all
completed by this Wednesday (5/15) and the fact that very few vendors were
actually going to be ready in time to do more, we have been forced to go back
to the initial technical focus scope of just doing browser/artifact.
Don;
Simon Godik wrote:
OverXeer, Inc will
be participating in saml interop (on the west coast) for the authorization
decisionI would like to work with interested parties on the test spec.Simon
Godik
