Yes that's what I did now. (see the other email I just sent out).
https://higgins.eclipse.org/cloud-selector-test/

We can discuss at IIW whether that's smart or not...

Markus

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:37 PM, John Bradley <[email protected]> wrote:

> In that case the actual token type requested would be encoded in the query
> string of the token AX identifier.
> You still thinking of base64 encoding the object tag to turn it into a
> query string?
>
> John B.
>
> On 12-May-09, at 10:33 AM, Markus Sabadello wrote:
>
> I was planning to add the object tag in the query string of the token AX
> identifier. HTTP GETting that object tag from the RP sounds too complicated
> to me.
>
> I will still do an HTTP GET on the return_to URL in order to get the
> certificate.
>
> Markus
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 9:38 PM, John Bradley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The same way that the token type is included in the object tag now.
>> So for the sake of argument you could do a GET on the page that the user
>> would normally click on with the object tag if it knew where the page was.
>> The OP is the selector.
>>
>> I don't know what the best format for the info the info is.
>>
>> One other alternative is to use AX STORE to push a base64 encoded version
>> of the XHTML or object tag.  Then the certificate could be retrieved from
>> the post URI.
>>
>> There are a bunch of options.  Making an assumption about the token type
>> an the AX URI is probably not ideal.
>>
>> John B.
>>
>> On 11-May-09, at 8:40 PM, Markus Sabadello wrote:
>>
>> Hmm thanks, but I don't really get that..
>>
>> I understand the OP needs to do a GET to the RP in order to obtain the RP
>> certificate for encrypting the token.
>> But how can that GET tell the OP anything about the token type?
>>
>> Markus
>>
>> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 8:28 PM, John Bradley <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Markus,
>>>
>>> I don't know that I would be that specific about the token type.  It
>>> could be SAML2.0 or something else.The actual token type and claims for
>>> it need to be retrieved via a GET to the RP so that you have the cert chain.
>>>
>>> So I would go with something more generic that indicates to the OP that
>>> it needs to do that GET to determine the token to be returned.
>>>
>>> John B.
>>>
>>> On 11-May-09, at 8:08 PM, Markus Sabadello wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi John,
>>>
>>> Do you have any intelligent idea for the AX identifiers for
>>> 1. requesting the whole token (via AX FETCH)
>>> 2. offering a new i-card (via AX STORE)
>>>
>>> My idea would be:
>>> 1. urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:assertion
>>> 2. http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/05/identity
>>>
>>> Markus
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 8:44 PM, John Bradley <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Markus,
>>>>
>>>> I think that captures it.
>>>> The only change I might make is having token be if_available.  That will
>>>> decrease the likelihood a non IMI OP might reject the authen request 
>>>> because
>>>> it cannot fulfill a required claim.
>>>>
>>>> The IMI OP would prefer the token AX attribute for the reply if the user
>>>> selects a card that can provide it.
>>>>
>>>> John B.
>>>> On 1-May-09, at 8:25 PM, Markus Sabadello wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I tried capturing some thoughts that came up on the last Higgins call,
>>>> regarding building better IMI support into the OpenID-based "Higgins Web
>>>> Selector":
>>>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Web_Selector_1.1#Requesting_an_i-card
>>>>
>>>> It lists a few possible methods for "doing i-cards" over OpenID:
>>>>
>>>> Method 1: AX attribute identifiers are claim URIs
>>>> Method 2a: Well-known AX attribute identifiers are mapped to claim URIs
>>>> Method 2b: Well-known SREG attribute identifiers are mapped to claim
>>>> URIs
>>>> Method 3: Advanced IMI compatibility
>>>>
>>>> Markus
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> higgins-dev mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> higgins-dev mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> higgins-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> higgins-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> higgins-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> higgins-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> higgins-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> higgins-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
higgins-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev

Reply via email to