Persistent Assertion/Subject/NameID from LDAP Attribute

[Henry B. Hotz]

That's a good page, thanks.  (Not the one Google sends you to if you think the opposite of "transient" is a good search term.)

On another Google tangent, they recommend "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.1:nameid-format:unspecified" for use with their Apps.  Of course that's for a user name, not necessarily an email.

Since I see that the SAML 1.1 email format is listed in the SAML 2.0 core document.  Should I conclude that it is to be used with SAML 2.0?  I.e. they just didn't think they needed to re-invent the wheel?

On Aug 9, 2012, at 8:17 AM, Chad La Joie wrote:

> Right, as documented here:
> https://wiki.shibboleth.net/confluence/display/SHIB2/IdPNameIdentifier
> 
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Cantor, Scott <cantor.2 at osu.edu> wrote:
>> In part. There's also a precedence setting in the relying party file that
>> tells it what formats to "prefer" for a given SP or set of SPs, and that
>> plus the filter policy results in a set of candidate NameID possibilities
>> that gets randomly picked from.
> 
> -- 
> Chad La Joie
> www.itumi.biz
> trusted identities, delivered
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list send an email to users-unsubscribe at shibboleth.net

------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed in this message are mine,
not those of Caltech, JPL, NASA, or the US Government.
Henry.B.Hotz at jpl.nasa.gov, or hbhotz at oxy.edu