[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [security-services] Additional bindings action items
I have previously published a "short-list" of bindings action items generated at F2F#4 based on my notes. http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200111/msg00034.html <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200111/msg00034.html > I am now publishing a supplementary list of additional action items gleaned from Steve Anderson's and Gil Pilz's excellent "raw notes". I request the TC chairs to apply appropriate persuasion and coercion to close all of these items in the next two weeks. All references to sections and line numbers refer to bindings-06.PDF 1. [Bob Blakley] * doc structuring issue: sections 3.1.2 thru 3.1.8 refer to a family of bindings, where 3.1.9 refers to a specific binding * WORK ITEM (BobB): provide text 2. [Jeff Hodges] Research Cipher suites and related information. 3. [Simon Godik] Renumber 3.1.9 to 3.2. Explain why this section is required in a SAML spec. After all SOAP has already defined SOAP HTTP binding. Why cant we just point to it. 4. [Prateek] Add high-level diagram for web browser profile in Section 4.1.1 5. [Bob Blakley] lines 481-482 Provide revised text that reflects that we are generating a new 20 byte string for every new assertion and that these 20 bytes contain somewhere between 20 bytes and 8 bytes of entropy. 6. [Simon Godik] lines 549 - 569 Would like additional text indicating that before Step 6 the source and destination site could have additional interactions using SAML protocol (e.g., additional queries).
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC