RE: [dss] some changes in requirements draft 3

["Nick Pope" <pope@secstan.com>]

Trevor,

The reason is that it is a separate assertion, with its implied semantics,
but part of the DSS information.

Nick

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Trevor Perrin [mailto:trevp@trevp.net]
> Sent: 09 April 2003 08:09
> To: Nick Pope; dss@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [dss] some changes in requirements draft 3
>
>
> At 06:08 PM 4/8/2003 +0100, Nick Pope wrote:
> >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >
> >Can I suggest that we use the same structure as SAML for
> including the name
> >with a type identifier (but without the rest of the SAML
> structure) or the
> >full SAML structure.
> >
> >Again can we have the ability to identify the authentication algorithm
> >without the full SAML structure (and its associated semantics).
>
> Do you mean we should support those instead of, or in addition
> to, using a
> full SAML Assertion?  What's the rationale for not wanting to use
> the full
> Assertion?
>
> Trevor
>
>
>