RE: review of draft-wierenga-ietf-sasl-saml-00

["Scott Cantor" <[e-mail]>]

> I would prefer if channel bindings is done in a GS2 compatible way, to
> allow a SAML SASL mechanism to be usable as a GSS-API mechanism as well.
> By using the GS2 prefix, you also get support for authorization
> identities.
> 
> If authors are interested here, I could help with the GS2 prefix part so
> that it causes minimal confusion for non-GSS-API people and still allows
> that variant.  I made this suggestion for the OpenID SASL mechanism as
> well.

I'm completely open to any and all SASL/GSS-related suggestions and
improvements. This is sort of a 5 year old work item for me that dates back
to SAML 2's initial design work, which I intended to demonstrate as a fit
for SASL and never got the time or the perceived interest to get done.

I just want to get a proposal out that "fits" my original intention for how
this would look, and then let the experts on the non-SAML parts whack it
into shape once there's an understanding of the compatibility trade-offs.

-- Scott