RE: [saml-dev] SAML, trust and WS.

["Scott Cantor" <cantor.2@osu.edu>]

> Unfortunately the liberty framework is not only about delegation.

That's true. Since WS-* seems to include solving the origins of the universe
in its purview, I'm not sure what the scope of the various efforts matters.
They're all too big.

> I Must be wrong here (please let me know if I am) 
> but it seems that to achieve delegation I also then have to implement
> the remaining part of the LA framework (Discovery, etc.) an from what I
> have understood even the Web service application id driven by the
> Liberty WSDL.

Nope, untrue. You use what you want to use. The point is not whether you can
absolutely know that you will be interoperable anyway, but how interoperable
can you possibly be inventing something yourself?

> Ideally, I think, the Authentication/authorization bit should be
> separate from the application and so for example
> implement the SAML framework leaving the Web service implementation
> independent (I might go for liberty, I might go for WS-*, I might go for
> my own implementation of the WSDL).

Liberty security mechanisms are separate from the rest of the material. It's
basically a stand-alone piece.

I agree with you in the sense that it would be nice if there was one way to
do a certain semantic with SAML tokens, that was independent of the
surrounding material, but right now there's not. So nothing we say is going
to somehow change that fact by next week.

-- Scott