El 09/12/11 20:46, Cantor, Scott escribió: > On 12/9/11 3:19 AM, "Jim Schaad" <[email protected]> wrote: >> I think that this may be required in both directions. That is the RP may >> need to tell the IdP what it wants as well. >> >> I completely agree that there is going to need to be an OOB agreement >> about >> what the values mean. But I still potentially want to do the selection >> process. > Note that this is definitely non-trivial, and creates a lot of deployment > complexity when you deal with IdPs that support multiple (or the absence > of) LOAs, and the reality that many RPs need different LOAs to perform > different functions, often from a single client. > > In practice, the support in SAML for this has been poorly implemented, or > not at all, and there's not much deployment experience with it.
Hi, We made some work some time ago, in the context of the DAMe project, you can find some information here: http://www.item.ntnu.no/europki08/presentations/europki08-lopez.ppt of course, it is out of date, take it like related work regards, Gabi. > > -- Scott > > > _______________________________________________ > abfab mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Gabriel Lpez Milln Departamento de Ingeniera de la Informacin y las Comunicaciones University of Murcia Spain Tel: +34 868888504 Fax: +34 868884151 email: [email protected] _______________________________________________ abfab mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab
