RE: [saml-dev] SAML, trust and WS.

["Moehrke, John \(GE Healthcare\)" <John.Moehrke@med.ge.com>]

Scott, 

I doubly thank you for this document. This is indeed one of the big
problems I have had in the healthcare standards world (IHE). For me all
of these network transactions need to be based on standards that can be
pre-coordinated to some extent. We want to leave as little to be screwed
up at integration time as possible. This is not because we are control
freaks, but rather we are dealing with systems that have lives at stake.
In some cases the systems involved are Medical-Devices and thus need to
be 100% verified and validated, thus installing components specific to
the actual ID solution is unacceptable.

How can I help in the development of your document? When do you think it
will be done?

I do have some more complexity to my use-cases as well. Not only do we
have the browser talking to web-server talking to web-service. But we
also have an ebXML Registry behind that web-service. We also have cases
where the web-service is not an online (HTTP) transaction but is bundled
up in an SMIME package.  We also have cases where there is no browser,
but rather a smart application.

I suspect that I won't have solutions for all of the above use-case, nor
some of my other use-cases not described here. It is good to see someone
working on these real-world scenarios.

John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: william [mailto:oasis.saml@javafreelancer.net] 
> Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2005 9:52 AM
> To: saml-dev@lists.oasis-open.org; Scott Cantor
> Subject: RE: [saml-dev] SAML, trust and WS.
> 
> thanks for putting this out there, scott:
> 
> https://authdev.it.ohio-state.edu/twiki/bin/view/Shibboleth/Sh
> ibPortals
> 
> draft-cantor-saml-sso-delegation-01.pdf is very well-written. it 
> addresses pretty much exactly what this thread discusses. couple 
> questions, please?
> 
> 1) off the top of your head, can you think of any obstacles that 
> might turn up if a saml 1.1 implementation is tailored to use a 
> similar approach as what you describe in 
> draft-cantor-saml-sso-delegation-01.pdf for saml 2.0?
> 
> 2) what are the likely next steps (time lines?) re the oasis 
> life-cycle of the draft?
> 
> many thanks,
> will
> 
> --
> 
>