>
>    Josh> I agree that is an option; and it wouldn't be the end of the
>    Josh> world if that's where we end up. But I believe it would impede
>    Josh> interoperable deployments because it defers this discussion to
>    Josh> implementers and users who won't, on the whole, care about or
>    Josh> understand the issues. I would prefer to have a simple
>    Josh> interoperable solution that works for 99% of the users than a
>    Josh> less constrained but accordingly more complex solution that
>    Josh> satisfies the remaining 1%.
>
>IDP MAY sign + RP MAY ignore + RP MUSt verify doesn't meet the IETf's
>interoperability criteria because an IDP that does not support
>signatures cannot work with an RP that requires them.

I agree. I thought Stephen's suggestion was IdP MAY sign + RP MAY verify.
This at least gets you interoperability, in the absence of a common TA, if
the RP chooses not to verify the signature (if any).

>So, I would not support a MTI strategy that depended  on shared trust
>anchors.

Agreed.

Josh.



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