Got it. Michael. As a conclusion I would say new implementations should just
focus on SAML 2.0.
Thanks guys for answers.
Regards
Kapil Sachdeva
http://www.dotnetcard.com/blogs/ksachdeva
----- Original Message -----
From: "Beach, Michael C" <>
To: "Reid, Irving" <>; "Kapil Sachdeva"
<>; "Scott Cantor" <>
Cc: <>
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 5:53 PM
Subject: RE: [saml-dev] Which version to use?
Just to emphasize Irving's point. The Liberty Alliance states no more
work will be done on ID-FF because it has been turned over to OASIS. I
don't mean this in a derogatory way, but ID-FF is effectively a "dead
end". Yes it works, yes it was quality work, yes it benefited the
industry, but I personally don't see why a new project would consider
using ID-FF over SAMLv2 (unless you are deploying NOW and need concrete
stable standards NOW). The future along this path is SAMLv2.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Reid, Irving [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 2:09 PM
To: Kapil Sachdeva; Scott Cantor
Cc:
Subject: RE: [saml-dev] Which version to use?
> From: Kapil Sachdeva [mailto:]
...
> Scott, I am also sure vendors will implement both as they will be left
> with no other choice like having a merge of SAML & Liberty standard
> into one.
SAMLv2 *is* the merge of SAML and Liberty ID-FF standards into one. That
is why Liberty contributed their ID-FF work to OASIS; both organizations
agreed that it would be best to move to a single standard, managed by an
acknowledged public standards body.
- irving -
