security-services message

Subject: Re: PartnerID format

From: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren@telia.com>
To: Tim Moses <tim.moses@entrust.com>,OASIS SAML <security-services@lists.oasis-open.org>,"Mishra, Prateek" <pmishra@netegrity.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 22:57:55 +0200

From the bindings-list:

>Discussions at the f2f#4 and at the bindings con-call on September 6, 2001
>raised several issues concerning the "PartnerID" component of a SAML
>artifact (Section 4.1.3, draft-sstc-bindings-model-05). I have split the
>discussion into several sub-parts, so that folks can separately agree or
>disagree with each sub-part. Please respond with a set of choices and
>rationale (if appropriate).

Prateek et al,

I did not find any alternative that I would support as I have already
shown that PartnerIDs can easily be completely eliminated, and most URL
restrictions as well.  And by the very same change you would also get
improved system reliability, and user-friendliness as "bonus".

What more could one possibly want?

Other issues:  http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200108/msg00166.html

Anders