Re: Issue Group 1 - SSO - Straw Ballot

[Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren@telia.com>]

Darren,
I definitely like the text you have written regarding the different issues!

Regarding the interaction diagrams I am sort of lost both due to too limted
information of what is carried around by the arrows, and to slightly inconsequent descriptions.
An example of the latter is UnknownPartner.png where there are some verify and auth decision steps
that IMO are relevant to all Web-user inter-domain auth* cases.  Is this a Shibboleth use case BTW?

The there is a mix of push and pull models that are hard to follow.  And are
there any pros and cons listed?  I like to see the tradeoffs before I take a stand.

It is hard to belive that we really are ready to vote on Shibboleth issues given
the limited dicussions on the consequences.  Personally I think the
s.c. ARundgrenPush and a good Shibboleth design only have to differ in the initial steps.
But this is not yet a fact as there may be things I don't know about Shibboleth.

Anders

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Darren Platt" <dplatt@securant.com>
To: "UseCaseList" <security-use@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2001 20:13
Subject: Issue Group 1 - SSO - Straw Ballot


> Attached is a write-up of the issues related to SSO (IssueGroup1.txt), with
> the goal of formatting them in such a way that it is possible to vote on
> some resolution.  My goal is to vote on them on our call on Wednesday, where
> people will be asked to choose one of the possible resolutions listed for
> each issue (or abstain).  The attached issue group list is a text file, and
> it contains references to the attached graphics.
> 
> If there is some information or argument missing in these write-ups, please
> let me know before end of day Friday so I can attempt to resolve it.  I hope
> to then distribute a final 'ballot' on Monday which will contain writeups
> for issue groups 1-SSO Variations, 3-Sessions, and 5-AuthC Protocols, which
> we can then use to vote.
> 
> I will be sending out a proposed subcommittee voting process for your review
> today if possible - if not tomorrow.  If it seems workable to everyone, I
> will propose this process on the call on Wednesday.  It would be great if we
> could get most of the discussion out of the way on the list beforehand so
> that Wednesday can be productive.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Darren
> 
> 
> Darren Platt
> Principal Technical Evangelist
> Securant Technologies
> 1 Embarcadero Center, Floor 5
> San Francisco, CA 94111
> tel - (415) 315-1529
> fax - (415) 315-1545
> http://www.securant.com/
> -----------------------------
> 
>