I agree that is an option; and it wouldn't be the end of the world if
that's where we end up. But I believe it would impede interoperable
deployments because it defers this discussion to implementers and users
who won't, on the whole, care about or understand the issues. I would
prefer to have a simple interoperable solution that works for 99% of the
users than a less constrained but accordingly more complex solution that
satisfies the remaining 1%.

(This is, as I understand it, the reason why the SAML community ended up
with the 'Metadata Interoperability Profile'; which constrains the
possible expressible trust semantics of SAML 2.0 federation metadata to
facilitate interop).

Josh.

On 02/10/2012 17:03, "Stephen Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>I had a quick look at the -03 draft and I'm confused.
>
>Are "ignore signatures is the MUST implement" and
>"MUST NOT sign" the only real options?
>
>For example, I don't get why "IdP MAY sign +
>RP is NOT REQUIRED to verify signature +
>RP MUST implement signature verification"
>is not an option. (Assuming you add text that
>justifies why hop-by-hop integrity is ok.)
>
>Note: I'm not saying that the above is what
>you ought do, I'm saying I don't get why its
>not possible.
>
>S.
>
>On 10/02/2012 04:47 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> OK, I'm with Josh.  This is going to be one of those cases where digging
>> in heals now and saying MUST NOT sign will save us political grief
>> later.  A lot of people like Stephen are going to look at ignore
>> signatures and complain, where as they would be more willing to accept
>> that we're simply not using per-message signatures at all.  It's
>> unfortunate because I do think there ar situations where signatures are
>> valuable.  However, I'm imagining that we're going to be having this
>> argument again and again and again and it just won't be worth the cost.
>> 
>> 


Janet is a trading name of The JNT Association, a company limited
by guarantee which is registered in England under No. 2881024 
and whose Registered Office is at Lumen House, Library Avenue,
Harwell Oxford, Didcot, Oxfordshire. OX11 0SG

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

Reply via email to