required friendlyName?

[Peter Schober]

* David Bantz <dabantz at alaska.edu> [2014-07-29 01:59]:
> > <resolver:AttributeDefinition xsi:type="ad:Simple" id="email" sourceAttributeID="mail">
> > <resolver:Dependency ref="myLDAP" />
> > <resolver:AttributeEncoder xsi:type="enc:SAML1String" name="urn:mace:dir:attribute-def:mail" />
> > <resolver:AttributeEncoder xsi:type="enc:SAML2String" name="urn:oid:0.9.2342.19200300.100.1.3" friendlyName="BbSPEmailAddress" />
> > 
> > </resolver:AttributeDefinition>
> 
> Is there a way I can encode and release these standard attributes
> with the unusual friendlyNames short of creating a bunch of shadow
> attributes that differ from the norm only by id and friendlyName?

No, you'd have to duplicate them all. Not that I'd recommend this.

> Is it me, or does this represent a bizarre SAML implementation?

I'd try without doing any of that. IIRC the SAML spec states that you
must not rely on the friendlyName to determine the attribute. So if
not sending the desired friendlyName value breaks stuff (and sending
it "fixes" it), you know just how bizzare the implementation is.
Given that many seem to rely on that service maybe organizing a call
with the vendor (via InC or REFEDS) will get them to fix this -- if
they indeed incorrectly rely on friendlyName, that is.
-peter