SAML1 for particular Relying Party within a federation

[Ian Young]

> On 11 May 2015, at 11:58, Keith Carr <kecarr at sgul.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> I’m basically looking to force one SP that provides it’s metadata via the UKfederation to use SAML1 for its response and assertion.

Unless you're going to be sending unsolicited responses, it is the SP's choice that will determine which protocol is used for the transaction. If the SP sends you a SAML 2 authentication request, you will be replying using SAML 2 or not at all. An SP will of course not do that if it can see that you only support SAML 1.

Can you give us some idea as to why you want to not use SAML 2 if it's available to both parties?

    -- Ian




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://shibboleth.net/pipermail/users/attachments/20150511/e4d26dcc/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5250 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://shibboleth.net/pipermail/users/attachments/20150511/e4d26dcc/attachment.p7s>