Follow-up on question that I recently asked on the users list about name ID support in Shibboleth IdP

[Cantor, Scott]

> It's certainly not in 3.0 roadmap, that's already (over) full and set.
>  That said, it's something that could be pursued for 3.1, 3.2, etc.
> We would definitely need to think about it a lot more than we have to
> date though.  Theres no doubt a ton of edge cases to deal with to make
> a robust implementation.

Yes. I would add in particular we have no thinking done on when the IdP would trigger those messages and what the source of those events would be, because unlike the commercial products, we don't try to be the repository of identity data, which is where those changes get triggered from.

Part of the feature set (the unlinking in particular) also overlaps with the notion of a "user UI" for manipulating state related to the IdP, which has come up occasionally, and also overlaps with consent management.

-- Scott