Re: [security-services] Proposed Charter Update

["Conor P. Cahill" <concahill@aol.com>]

Anthony Nadalin wrote on 11/17/2003, 8:28 AM:
 >
 > So you believe that "Develop an approach for unifying various identity
 > federation models found in real-world SAML and non SAML based
 > implementations and security architectures" is out of scope ?

For the SSTC?  Yes.

With the removal of "and non SAML", I would say it IS in scope for the SSTC.

 > This was an attempt to help bridge (not actually do the work but
 > "Develop an approach") the SS-TC work and other work, and what
 > I take away is that you don't  want this to happen.

I have never said that I don't want this to happen.  I think it could be 
a very good thing, depending upon how it is done.   However, that does 
not mean that I think non-SAML architectures should be in scope for the 
SSTC.

Conor