Tom Scavo wrote on 2009-07-05:
> And I appreciate your comment, Scott, thanks. Others should chime in
> as well. Hal's initial reaction on the call was to NOT take the HoK
> Assertion Profile to CS at this time, so maybe it's not such a good
> idea in general. I'm proposing we do it since I can't see a good
> reason not to, but I may be missing something.
To be clear, based on what I know of the intentions here, I *don't* think
adding some kind of Kerberos-based language here is necessarily going to
change the existing language in a way that renders it somehow fundamentally
incompatible. I was mainly trying to say "if possible, let's keep it that
way".
-- Scott
