On 10/18/11 8:17 PM, "Sam Hartman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Well, note that anything coming out of attribute mapping in your SP is
>completely separate and is unprefixed; the administrator is assumed
>to know their own policy.

That's generally true, but it's still desirable for applications sitting
on top to be able to distinguish between a piece of data from one source
vs. another.

>So, I'd prefer the context be fixed. I think we need it to be fixed for
>GSS-EAP. If the use cases for ECP are going to be different then we
>should consider that. However it would be valuable if you could plug one
>in case of the other.

I guess the way I look at it is that as a consumer of the GSS naming
extensions, I'd be physically ill shipping code that hardcoded any names,
so I see it all as a config time question.

But then I'm also accused of designing systems that are too complex.

-- Scott

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

Reply via email to