IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Reaction to the current assertion pair {framework, SAML}

Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com> Thu, 27 February 2014 12:55 UTC

Return-Path: <bcampbell@pingidentity.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3A8A1A0256 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:55:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.513
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.513 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id grtJEX1l8a4H for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:54:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na3sys009aog113.obsmtp.com (na3sys009aog113.obsmtp.com [74.125.149.209]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 937E61A0249 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:54:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ig0-f174.google.com ([209.85.213.174]) (using TLSv1) by na3sys009aob113.postini.com ([74.125.148.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUw81oqzDSfC6i88R8Ip3eBrwfNhIO6Ua@postini.com; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:54:58 PST
Received: by mail-ig0-f174.google.com with SMTP id h18so3296669igc.1 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:54:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=/tKehSBduEUf7xQ0NZJ5Q2iOvAfFYJR4W0g7ELyYSuM=; b=BcmzEY0f5l+xdkj5y4mTplVx+l5aYcLYFml69AzPmVO2puy1L+BWZfG3zdjnQf796a Dz6EP1MQJkyClAaPJIcvZpAqa/T0N3dGglf1ICO5kaWZSgJEU9K0lRw+uSPj5mdbFS2N n9DQpelRVI27omSbiSgTZjyqK4eFakLVFIHeJJnQzPH2W1ETgpFWkOKUBr6ICTUHIps9 FZQxw1LG1oo5hPNkL2WW9tmgTbttfinH3CII5SbXl3zWRfuvk/Ca0v2FhWTUy5nnirWz N1BRNuhI8l4Qfx1wA/SbnAL2IZfeCS+zpwbgPicwb9JJoSCllEnsya6ydQpJrdR55ep0 /4gw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkqEXru/v+2jA6oumxlAY/ndfY6BVMrLx21uSS++gbNlW8GnYfaqQWxAeSTSdjfe53k7A4atgiir5dpmq7FklVLbI0BndBIOd6nwyBGqljHMaKCnzLaDjA2XvZaQd4EjOKtBQwYsOAVvs24LtngfT9+IDLUYg==
X-Received: by 10.50.47.110 with SMTP id c14mr6369312ign.4.1393505697917; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:54:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.50.47.110 with SMTP id c14mr6369298ign.4.1393505697796; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:54:57 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.65.4 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:54:27 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVBtsPKVFgy-9V1uLVBUGmoAUj+jJ_Pu_Pono4DWTwv5Pg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAC4RtVBtsPKVFgy-9V1uLVBUGmoAUj+jJ_Pu_Pono4DWTwv5Pg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 05:54:27 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+k3eCT6tebz-AGLR0tpZfPZFdgZAdhEYNvqSRNbp_jfDYvDUQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/3Qe0FegDlazf9nsnnnWHq1GiO3M
Cc: oauth <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Reaction to the current assertion pair {framework, SAML}
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 12:55:01 -0000

Thanks Barry! I am very happy to hear that.

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
>>> Any idea, on the two Assertion Documents, if there is or will be any
>>> feedback from the IESG and, if so, what form it might take?
>>
>> I'm sorry that I haven't been able to get to reviewing this yet --
>> I've had a bunch of pre-IETF travel, in addition to preparing for the
>> meeting.  I aim to have a look on the flights to London, so I hope to
>> get you feedback this Thursday.
>
> It's not Thursday yet, at least not in San Diego, but I've had time in
> the UA Club before flying out.  I haven't reviewed them in detail, but
> I looked through them with respect to the DISCUSS issues I'd raised
> before.
>
> You'll be happy to hear that on those issues, I think we understand
> each other and the current documents seem fine -- they define things
> in a way that I think people can implement interoperably without
> calling someone on the phone first.
>
> Thanks for sticking with this, understanding what I was on about, and
> sorting it out.
>
> Barry

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email