Re: [security-services] Comments on Tech Overview rev 13

[Paul Madsen <paulmadsen@rogers.com>]

Fair enough, I'll revise accordingly

paul

Tom Scavo wrote:
> It was awhile ago, but if I recall, Scott subsequently corrected me
> (and I think he's right).
>
> Tom
>
> On 7/19/07, Paul Madsen <paulmadsen@rogers.com> wrote:
>> Thaks Tom, that would be my view as well -  but in the past thread you
>> appear to be arguing the opposite for the 'resource' steps :-)
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>>
>> Tom Scavo wrote
>>
>>  >> Eve wrote
>>
>>  > > - Sec 4.1.2, Figure 12 (and globally throughout all the figures): I
>>  > > suspect the arrow for step 1, "Access resource", is supposed to be
>>  > > dotted, not solid, because it's out of band for SAML.  (This is
>>  > > probably a bug of long standing -- I'm sorry!)
>>
>> My interpretation is just the opposite.  By all indications, steps 1
>> and 7 are in band and in scope.  In particular, see sections 4.1.3.1
>> and 4.1.3.6 in SAMLProf.
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>>
>>
>> paul
>>
>> Tom Scavo wrote:
>> > Paul, I think a dotted line should signify a step that is out of
>> > scope.  In that case, all four of the steps you mentioned would be
>> > represented by dotted lines, I believe.
>> >
>> > That's my two cents worth, anyway. :-)
>> >
>> > Tom
>> >
>> > On 7/19/07, Paul Madsen <paulmadsen@rogers.com> wrote:
>> >> Finally getting to my graphic editing AI
>> >>
>> >> The various sequence diagrams have some or all of the following 
>> message
>> >> steps
>> >>
>> >> - Access Resource
>> >> - Challenge for credentials
>> >> - User Login
>> >> - Supply resource
>> >>
>> >> Was it the agreement that the first & last are to be drawn as solid
>> >> lines? And the middle 2 as dotted?
>> >>
>> >> Paul
>> >>
>> >> Tom Scavo wrote:
>> >> > On 3/11/07, Eve L. Maler <Eve.Maler@sun.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I personally don't think we need to hew to this rule.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > That's fine.  It's mostly pedagogical and not worth quibbling
>> >> about in
>> >> >> > general.  I personally find this to be a useful rule when 
>> writing
>> >> >> > documentation and so forth since it leads to reasonably complete
>> >> >> > end-to-end flows that novices can understand.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm game to change it -- if Paul feels like doing the graphic
>> >> >> editing!  But I don't feel it's absolutely essential unless
>> >> >> something thinks we're making it more confusing this way.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm okay with the single "swoopy arrow" :-) but did we agree that
>> >> > steps 1 and 7 should be represented by a solid line?  That's my 
>> main
>> >> > concern.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks,
>> >> > Tom
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Paul Madsen             e:paulmadsen @ ntt-at.com
>> >> NTT                     p:613-482-0432
>> >>                         m:613-302-1428
>> >>                         aim:PaulMdsn5
>> >>                         web:connectid.blogspot.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> -- 
>> Paul Madsen             e:paulmadsen @ ntt-at.com
>> NTT                     p:613-482-0432
>>                         m:613-302-1428
>>                         aim:PaulMdsn5
>>                         web:connectid.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>
>

-- 
Paul Madsen             e:paulmadsen @ ntt-at.com
NTT                     p:613-482-0432
                        m:613-302-1428
                        aim:PaulMdsn5
                        web:connectid.blogspot.com