Re: [security-services] NameIDPolicy Format use clarification

[Greg Whitehead <grw@trustgenix.com>]

On Dec 16, 2004, at 1:42 PM, Scott Cantor wrote:

> That's because Liberty didn't support traditional SAML identifiers, 
> which
> are just as reasonable to encrypt as anything else. Persistent isn't 
> that
> special. (That would be my subtitle for SAML 2.0.)

Indeed, 'persistent' is somewhat of a misleading since X509SubjectName 
ids, for example, are also fairly persistent. I guess we chose it to 
contrast with 'transient'. A better choice might have been 'pseudonym' 
or 'pseudonym:persistent' and 'pseudonym:transient'.

-Greg