On Dec 16, 2004, at 1:42 PM, Scott Cantor wrote:
> That's because Liberty didn't support traditional SAML identifiers,
> which
> are just as reasonable to encrypt as anything else. Persistent isn't
> that
> special. (That would be my subtitle for SAML 2.0.)
Indeed, 'persistent' is somewhat of a misleading since X509SubjectName
ids, for example, are also fairly persistent. I guess we chose it to
contrast with 'transient'. A better choice might have been 'pseudonym'
or 'pseudonym:persistent' and 'pseudonym:transient'.
-Greg
