saml-dev message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: X509v3 vs. X509PKIPathv1 in signature part in WSS / SOAP messagesecurity

From: Shlomo Yona <S.Yona@F5.com>
To: "saml-dev@lists.oasis-open.org" <saml-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 02:31:39 -0700

Hello,

I wonder how popular is the usage of ValueType=”http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-x509-token-profile-1.0#X509PKIPathv1” vs. the usage of ValueType=”http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-x509-token-profile-1.0#X509v3” in BinarySecurityToken elements. Apparently, the former is more popular than the latter. Is your experience in the ``field’’ too?

Thanks.

Shlomo

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [saml-dev] X509v3 vs. X509PKIPathv1 in signature part in WSS/ SOAP message security
  - From: Chad La Joie <chad.lajoie@switch.ch>

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]