SAML attribute naming

[Eric Goodman]

So I've always assumed that the SAML spec called out the use of URNs for attribute naming. Reading the SAML spec looking for that, it appears the spec actually defines a standard for using LDAP/X.500 attribute encoding - which does require use of URNs for attribute naming - but does not require the use of that spec for SAML in general.

I'm currently working with a vendor that is asking for attributes with names (not friendly names) such as "firstname", "lastname",  etc.

Do I have any grounds to argue that those are invalid attribute names, and try to convince/force the vendor to provide urns for these? I will ask them to, but I'm looking for something that backs up a claim that using such names is "wrong" rather than just "not the way we do things".

(FWIW, the vendor also defines several vendor-specfiic attributes that also have non-URN values, and since those are specific to this vendor the non-URN-ness of those attributes may not be as much of an issue for us.)

Thanks,

--- Eric




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://shibboleth.net/pipermail/users/attachments/20141017/5ab05691/attachment.html