[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [security-services] Please read BEFORE formal vote at TC call onOctober 16
Colleagues, I am calling for a formal vote at the October 16, TC meeting on the following topic: Which binding should SAML 1.0 call out as mandatory-to-implement? PLEASE CHOOSE ONE: (a) HTTP Binding (recall that the HTTP Binding in bindings-05 document describes how SAML request/response pairs are to be mapped into HTTP requests and responses) (b) SOAP/HTTP binding (by SOAP/HTTP we mean SOAP restricted to the case where it is used with HTTP as a transport. Bindings-5 also includes an outline for this case) NOTES: (1) In reviewing this question, please keep in mind the distinction between a "binding" and a "profile" as described in bindings-05. (2) Once we have a selected a "mandatory-to-implement" binding, it is certainly reasonable that we attempt to include the "other" binding in SAML 1.0. However, time constraints will not allow me to guarantee this outcome. In other words, the bindings group will only commit to fully specifying the mandatory-to-implement binding because of time and resource constraints. For further discussion please consult: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200110/msg00060.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-bindings/200110/msg00000.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200110/msg00068.html - prateek
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC