RE: [security-services] Back office scenarios / W-10

["Eric Gravengaard" <eric@reactivity.com>]

Krishna,

I have attached a similar use case write up. I would be interested in helping to work through the differences between Darren's and mine, although they are minor and mostly deal with the nature of mine as crossing company boundaries. Let me know how I can help with this work item.

Cheers,

Eric




-----Original Message-----
From: Krishna Sankar [mailto:ksankar@cisco.com] 
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 2:48 PM
To: 'Eve L. Maler'; security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [security-services] Back office scenarios / W-10


Hi all,

	The B2B scenario from Darren Platt (in pdf format !).
	
	So far, I can see, W-10 has two components - carry over (rejected)
items from SAML 1.x, and the back office scenario.

	a)	During F2F we decided not to reiterate the
action/aggregation of multiple bid use case, which I think is the (rejected)
carry over from the 1.x days for W-10.
	
	b)	The back office scenario, a good use case from Darren, fits
into the web service work item (I think it was W-15 or W-16. Just as a
pointer, W-11 was also collapsed with that work item, I think)

	So my suggestion is : Retire W-10, add Darren's use case to the web
service work item.

	A related question : The W-11 is related to firewall traversal. I
hope we have that item still in the works. This *could* be slightly
different from assertions across web services. Haven't seen the new work
item list.

-k. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Darren Platt [mailto:darren@pingid.com] 
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 9:55 AM
To: ksankar@cisco.com

Hi Krishna,

A brief write-up is attached.  Let me know if you want more detail.

Sorry I didn't get this to you before the F2F.

Darren


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krishna Sankar [mailto:ksankar@cisco.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 6:53 PM
> To: darren@pingid.com
> Subject: RE: Back office scenarios
>
>
> Darren,
>
> 	Thanks. A description of the scenario would be excellent. Also if
> you have any more general ideas, pl add them in. I do not think
> we have time
> to discuss but should be able to go over a couple of rounds over e-mail. I
> will present the ideas at the f2f (if we get a slot).
>
> -k.
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Darren Platt [mailto:darren@pingid.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 2:51 PM
> > To: ksankar@cisco.com
> >
> > Hi Krishna,
> >
> > Let me know how you would like to work together on the
> > back-office scenario
> > issue we signed up for on the concall.  I have a pretty good
> > recollection of
> > what we intended when we suggested it, but not having been
> > involved in SAML
> > for a while, I'm not sure what else it may now mean.
> >
> > If you'd like, I could write up a description of a scenario
> > for what I have
> > in mind and send it to you.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Darren
> >
> > ********************************************
> > Darren Platt
> > Ping Identity Corporation
> > darren@pingid.com
> >
> >
> >
>

B2B-SAML Use Case.pdf