RE: [security-services-comment] Comment on SAML 2.0 Session Token Profile Version 1.0

[Hal Lockhart <hal.lockhart@oracle.com>]

Thank you for your comment. You are correct.

 

This change was introduced in Draft 4, but I can not find the original comment that prompted the change to see if it was my mistake.

 

My guess is that the intended text was

 

The SA MUST set the value of the saml:ID of type xs:ID to a unique identifier as required by [SAML2-
Core].

 

Your text is less awkward.

However, because of the long delay and the many reviews required to get this document to the current point, I am going to ask the TC to move the document to Committee Specification without changing anything. I believe the original intent to follow the core spec is clear. Further, technically this comment is out of scope for the current public review (which only covers the changes related to RFC 6265). If this Profile is update in future, I will make this correction at this time.

 

Hal

-----Original Message-----
From: Anli Shundi [mailto:ashundi@tibco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 2:57 PM
To: security-services-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [security-services-comment] Comment on SAML 2.0 Session Token Profile Version 1.0

The draft [1] states at line 194 (emphasis mine)

ID [Required]
The SA MUST set the value of the saml:ID or xs:ID to a unique identifier as required by [SAML2-
Core].

It probably meant (i.e. it should be rephrased as follows instead)

ID [Required]
The SA MUST set the value of the saml:ID to a unique identifier of type xs:ID as required by [SAML2-
Core].

[1] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/43741/saml-session-token-v1.0-csprd03.zip

-- 
Anli Shundi                     ashundi@tibco.com
(919) 969 6518
TIBCO Software Inc.             www.tibco.com