Re: [security-services] Comment from: moebs@wiwi.uni-frankfurt.de

[prateek mishra <pmishra@principalidentity.com>]

This problem was not considered to be in scope for
SAML 2.0. I believe there is interest in its solution
and I would encourage you to submit use-cases,
solution proposals etc. for inclusion in a subsequent
SAML version.

Please see also:


http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200411/msg00089.html


--- prateek mishra <pmishra@principalidentity.com>
wrote:

> Comment from: moebs@wiwi.uni-frankfurt.de
> 
> Although a Single Logout protocol is introduced in
> the
> forthcoming SAML 2.0 specification, the problem of
> local session timeouts is not addressed.
> 
> Local session timeouts raise two important
> questions:
> 1.) What happens if the Identity Provider's local
> session times out?
> 2.) What happens if one of the Service Provider's
> local sessions time out?
> 
> To my mind, the introduction of a Single Session
> Keep-Alive Protocol could help answer these
> questions.
> 
> Will the problem of local session timeouts be
> addressed in one of the forthcoming revisions of the
> SAML specification?
> 
> 
> 
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> security-services-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> security-services-help@lists.oasis-open.org
> 
>