[Fwd: SAML for ebXML Registry 3.0 Specifications]

[Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>]

FYI... Richard tells me that the regrep-comment list is bouncing. Anyone 
know why?
In any event here is his comment which he CCed me on.

I have heard the same issue that Richard raises from other advanced 
users of ebXML Registry.

As you may recall we have alignment with SAML planned for version 4. 
Given that OASIS Security Services TC:

    http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=security

has already approved SAML 1.1 it becomes more significant that we 
address SAML integration with ebXML Registry standard.

Based on Richard's comment I have started looking into what it will take 
to support single signon based upon SAML 1.1 standard.
Preliminary research on SAML SOAP Binding:

*http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/3405/oasis-sstc-saml-bindings-1.1.pdf*

shows that we could easily add SAML 1.1 (and later SAML 2.0) support 
with no changes to RIM and
minor changes to ebRS. The change would be to describe how SAML 
assertions are communicated
within a SOAP-ENV:Body (see line 354 in SAML Bindings doc).

It seems that this could be a LOW Effort / HIGH Return feature to add to 
our 3.0 specs and I am willing to
do the spec changes in ebRS 2.7 to accommodate it. An open issue is 
whether SAML support should be required or optional feature for
ebXML Registry.

Kathryn, can we please place this request on our agenda
for next meeting? Thanks.

-- 
Regards,
Farrukh

--- Begin Message ---

• From: Richard Lessard <Richard.Lessard@pwgsc.gc.ca>
• To: regrep-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
• Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:31:01 -0400

Hi,

We are deploying ebXML Registry in the Canadian Government. One challenge we face is that we already have an existing enterprise user database where we maintain user credentials. When deploying ebXML Registry we are faced with having to duplicate our user database within ebXML Registry. We observe that the SAML 1.1 standard is an OASIS approved standard that could help address our problem completely by allowing single sign capability across all our SAML enabled systems thus eliminating the duplication of user databases.

We therefore request that ebXML Registry 3.0 specifications add support for single sign-on capability based upon SAML 1.1 standard. We believe that this feature is vitally important to the successful deployment of ebXML Registry within large enterprises such as ours.

Thank you for considering our request for adding SAML 1.1 support to ebXML Registry 3.0 specifications.

	Richard Lessard
	Programmer/Systems Analyst
	Public Works and Government Services Canada
	11 Rue Laurier, PdP III, 4A1. Hull, Quebec K1A 0S5
	Phone : (819) 956-0550
	richard.lessard@pwgsc.gc.ca

--- End Message ---