RE: [wss] SAML TP, Interop - dateTime formats

["Philpott, Robert" <rphilpott@rsasecurity.com>]

Timestamps in SAML assertions MUST use the UTC form ("Z" format).  The first
example you cite, which is inside an assertion, is thus invalid from a SAML
perspective and needs to be fixed.  

While WSS permits the TZ offset form, it RECOMMENDS use the UTC form and
states that parties SHOULD NOT rely on time resolution finer than
milliseconds.

I personally don't see the point in specifying anything finer than seconds,
but specifying milliseconds is also fine.  Thus I think either of the latter
2 forms you cite should be used.

Rob Philpott
Senior Consulting Engineer 
RSA Security Inc. 
Tel: 781-515-7115 
Mobile: 617-510-0893 
Fax: 781-515-7020 
mailto:rphilpott@rsasecurity.com 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maneesh Sahu [mailto:maneesh@westbridgetech.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 3:03 PM
> To: wss@lists.oasis-open.org; Levinson, Richard; ronald.monzillo@sun.com
> Subject: [wss] SAML TP, Interop - dateTime formats
> 
> I found different dateTime formats for IssueInstant, NotOnOrAfter and
> NotBefore timestamps in the SAML TP and Interop documents.
> 
> "2002-07-23T11:32:05.6228146-07:00" (SAML TP, Page 8, Line 226)
> "2002-06-19T16:58:33.173Z"          (SAML TP, Page 15, Line 101)
> ="2003-04-17T00:46:02Z"             (Interop, Page 33, Line 928)
> 
> Is there a preferred/prescribed dateTime format? It would be nice to
> have timestamps as defined in the WSS: SOAP Message Security 1.0->
> Security Timestamps section (Page 36, 37).
> 
> --ms
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
> the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-
> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wss/members/leave_workgroup.php.