RE: [security-services] Groups - draft-sstc-nameid-05.pdf uploade d

I didn't think to look back at earlier drafts before posting my message
earlier today, but did so subsequently.  -02, e.g., makes the statement
"Means shall be specified enabling the authentication authority to obtain
explicit confirmation by the principal before a federation is established."
The intent was that a means to obtain consent must be available, not to
mandate that the authentication authority (acting according to its policy)
must invoke that means on every federation instance. 

--jl

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Cantor [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 10:58 AM
To: Linn, John; 'Beach, Michael C';

Subject: RE: [security-services] Groups - draft-sstc-nameid-05.pdf
uploade d


> [JL] I don't believe that the requirements text as drafted 
> actually mandates per-instance explicit user consent.  
> Rather, lines 155-157 of nameid-06
> state: "... no federation shall be established without 
> approval by the principal's authentication authority, which 
> is relied upon to act in accordance with a policy accepted by 
> the principal, unless the deployment specifically obviates 
> the need for such privacy considerations."

Heh, well, that's because my last draft tweaked the text to say that. ;-)
The original text was explicit about requiring user consent.

-- Scott