Need for more specificity in issuer language

[Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>]

The section on relying parties identifying token issuers currently says:

When identifying a requirement for a specific token issuer, the relying party SHOULD use the identity provider's unique name (i.e., its "entityID").

 

This doesn’t specify which protocol elements are being referred to.  This is the corresponding language I’m using in the 1.1 profile:

When identifying a requirement for a specific token issuer, the Relying Party SHOULD use the Identity Provider's unique name (i.e., its "entityID") either as the value of the sp:Issuer/wsa:Address element in its security policy or as the value of the issuer object tag parameter.

 

I believe that we should use that in the 2.0 profile as well.

 

                                                                -- Mike