Metadata Changeover Questions

[Peter Schober]

* McKean, Brandon Scott - mckeanbs <mckeanbs at jmu.edu> [2015-07-22 17:45]:
> Maybe I simply don't understand, but why would there be any breakage
> at all if SAML1 support is still listed in metadata alongside SAML2
> support? Does it go back to SP side implementation issues? I
> suspected SP software would just use what it could from that and
> things would go smoothly, but I also may be giving it too much
> credit.

E.g. lesser software may not be expecting attribute names to change
on-the-wire from SAML1 to SAML2, but your Shib IDP will happily use
the SAML2 convention (or specification, for MACE-Dir defined
attributes, i.e., eduPerson) if the SP choses to now send a SAML2
request to your IDP if it detects the "new" SAML2 support in your
IDP's metadata.
-peter