Title: RSA SAML Interop 2005 Conference Call Minutes - Jan 19 2005
Thomas is correct on all three points.
--
Steve Anderson
OpenNetwork
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas
Wisniewski [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005
9:13 AM
To: Ciochon, Robert; samldemotech
Subject: RE: RSA SAML Interop 2005
Conference Call Minutes - Jan 19 2005
Bob, a couple of comments...
Regarding your comments on section 3.2
item 8. I think that either the section is wrong or your comments are
incorrect. Item 8 in section 3.2 talks about the step of doing another login
after the federation. So there should be no contention on this. The idea is
that the user federated their identify between the SP and IDP (so they had to
login in to the IDP and then SP to complete this). Now that they logged out
(item 7), they should be able to do the use case again (i.e., item 1). However,
this time after they go thru the steps (and log in at the IDP), they will
notice that they do NOT need to log in at the SP (i.e., the federation has
worked).
The oen item we discussed, which pertains
to whether a user logs into the SP or IDP first, is in terms of the federation
use case. I.e., to start federation (assuming the user is at the SP screen),
should the user log into the SP first and selects and IDP to federate with,
then they log into the IDP. Or should the flow be: log into the IDP first,
then the SP. Most were saying the IDP log in should be first. I believe Adam
was proposing the SP first. It would be simpler if we just used one flow.
Personally it does not matter to me.
Regarding your comments on Section 6, item
3. I would suggest that we have only ONE starting point for the optional case.
I.e., you start at the SP only. Your comment suggests that we can start at the
IDP as well. I.e., send an unsolicited <Response> for federation. What do
others think? If we do this as well, the guidelines will need to be updated to
reflect this. As of now, it implied an SP only starting point. If we only start
from the SP, then the IDP (after a user logs in) would only have a single list
of SPs (for the base case). Thoughts?
Tom.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ciochon, Robert
[mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005
8:35 PM
To: samldemotech
Subject: RSA SAML Interop 2005
Conference Call Minutes - Jan 19 2005
<<rsademotech-minutes-2005-01-19.doc>>
Robert Ciochon
eTrust
Development Manager
Computer
Associates
San
Diego, California
(858)
625-6866
