← Prev in month ← Prev in thread

Back office scenarios / W-10

From
Krishna Sankar <>
Date
2003-09-12T21:27:02+00:00
ID
Thread
Back office scenarios / W-10
Hi all,

	The B2B scenario from Darren Platt (in pdf format !).
	
	So far, I can see, W-10 has two components - carry over (rejected)
items from SAML 1.x, and the back office scenario.

	a)	During F2F we decided not to reiterate the
action/aggregation of multiple bid use case, which I think is the (rejected)
carry over from the 1.x days for W-10.
	
	b)	The back office scenario, a good use case from Darren, fits
into the web service work item (I think it was W-15 or W-16. Just as a
pointer, W-11 was also collapsed with that work item, I think)

	So my suggestion is : Retire W-10, add Darren's use case to the web
service work item.

	A related question : The W-11 is related to firewall traversal. I
hope we have that item still in the works. This *could* be slightly
different from assertions across web services. Haven't seen the new work
item list.

-k. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Darren Platt [mailto:] 
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 9:55 AM
To: 

Hi Krishna,

A brief write-up is attached.  Let me know if you want more detail.

Sorry I didn't get this to you before the F2F.

Darren


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krishna Sankar [mailto:]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 6:53 PM
> To: 
> Subject: RE: Back office scenarios
>
>
> Darren,
>
> 	Thanks. A description of the scenario would be excellent. Also if
> you have any more general ideas, pl add them in. I do not think
> we have time
> to discuss but should be able to go over a couple of rounds over e-mail. I
> will present the ideas at the f2f (if we get a slot).
>
> -k.
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Darren Platt [mailto:]
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 2:51 PM
> > To: 
> >
> > Hi Krishna,
> >
> > Let me know how you would like to work together on the
> > back-office scenario
> > issue we signed up for on the concall.  I have a pretty good
> > recollection of
> > what we intended when we suggested it, but not having been
> > involved in SAML
> > for a while, I'm not sure what else it may now mean.
> >
> > If you'd like, I could write up a description of a scenario
> > for what I have
> > in mind and send it to you.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Darren
> >
> > ********************************************
> > Darren Platt
> > Ping Identity Corporation
> > 
> >
> >
> >
>
← Prev in month ← Prev in thread