OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

security-services message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [security-services] goal statement thread


At the F2F this past week, we got unanimous consent on the following 
wording:

==
The goals of the SAML 2.0 effort include:

o Addressing issues and enhancement requests that have arisen from
experience with real-world SAML implementations and with standards
architectures that use SAML, such as the OASIS WSS and XACML work.

o Adding support for features that were deferred from previous
versions of SAML for schedule reasons, such as session support, the
exchange of metadata to ensure more interoperable interactions, and
collection of credentials.

o Converging on a unified technology approach for identity federation
by integrating the ID-FF specifications contributed to the TC by the
Liberty Alliance.
==

However, JeffH pointed out to me that we let a small bug creep in. 
Though we mention "ID-FF" in the third bullet, Version 1.1 (which is all 
that has been contributed so far) is not technically called ID-FF.  Only 
that portion of Version 1.2 that we hope will be contributed soon can be 
given that label.

On Tuesday I plan to make a motion to simply strike the "ID-FF" part. 
Since we already mention the identity federation focus of the 
contributions in that same bullet, I think the remainder will be fine:

"Converging on a unified technology approach for identity federation by 
integrating the specifications contributed to the TC by the Liberty 
Alliance."

	Eve

Eve L. Maler wrote:

> Yeah, I put the V1.2 part in brackets because I didn't know if it was 
> appropriate to put out a formal goal statement that mentions something 
> that's as yet unsubmitted.  How about this sleight-of-hand?
> 
> "This support will be based on the ID-FF specifications contributed by 
> the Liberty Alliance to the TC."
> 
> Let's see if we can get TC agreement on this whole statement at the next 
> telecon.
> 
>     Eve
> 
> Mishra, Prateek wrote:
> 
>> Eve,
>>
>> Your re-spin works for me except for:
>>
>> This support will be based on the Liberty
>>
>>>> Alliance ID-FF V1.1 [and V1.2?] specifications that were contributed 
>>>> to the TC.
>>
>>
>>
>> I believe this should read ID-FF V1.1 and V1.2 specifications. The former
>> has been submitted to the TC and the latter has been requested from the
>> Liberty Alliance Organization.

-- 
Eve Maler                                        +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems                            cell +1 781 354 9441
Web Products, Technologies, and Standards    eve.maler @ sun.com



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]