Scott,

What I suggested was that the overall attribute be allowed to carry
arbitrary XML rather than be restricted to SAML.  It would still have the CT
field which could be used to identify more specifically what the XML content
was.

Jim


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cantor, Scott E. [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 1:38 PM
> To: Jim Schaad
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [abfab] Comments on draft-ietf-abfab-aaa-saml-00
> 
> > Is there a reason to label this as being SAML specific rather than
> > just letting it be XML values and letting the construct type identify
> > the type of values?
> 
> Because it would be expensive to have to go parsing things just to find
the
> one you knew how to handle. Same reason most XML vocabularies have
> their own MIME types.
> 
> -- Scott

_______________________________________________
abfab mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab

Reply via email to