my sense of the paper's summary was that it recommended the model used
by the LOA profile.
For the wiki page, I confess I saw 'extension' and assumed that they
were contemplating new elements within the AC schema in order to deal
with ENISA requirements
Paul
RL 'Bob' Morgan wrote:
alpine.LFD.2.00.0908012251010.9479@perf.cac.washington.edu"
type="cite">
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, Paul Madsen wrote:
Colin, yes I expect that the authn context
piece of the LOA profile will, notwithstanding this Wiki page that
suggests a different model, give ENISA what they need by standardizing
how to define auth context classes against LOA documentation
I'm not seeing what you're seeing. Proposal 3 on the wiki page
suggests:
it could have a placeholder for links to level schemes and, perhaps
using
Context Classes (e.g. EU Level 1, EU Level 2)
Isn't that what our doc does?
I can't tell what the paper is proposing.
In any case the ENISA group should certainly review the TC draft.
- RL "Bob"
this view would appear to be confirmed by
this paper
http://www.enisa.europa.eu/doc/pdf/deliverables/enisa_IDABC_SAML.pdf
paul
Colin Wallis wrote:
Greetings all
I was sent this link in relation to some ITU-T engagement I'm
having at the moment.
http://wiki.enisa.europa.eu/index.php?title=Authentication_Interoperability
I don't recall engagement from Giles's team since, what, late
last year?
Cheers
Colin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
|