Peter Schober peter.schober at
Sat Feb 24 14:11:57 EST 2018

* Cantor, Scott <cantor.2 at> [2018-02-23 19:19]:
> > Is there simply another type I should be using? Otherwise I see no
> > alternative to scripting the whole thing from scratch, by hashing
> > the 3-tuple myself.
> I'm still not getting it, I think. Are you asking how to get
> different values out? Or how to deal with the fact that you don't
> want different values?

The former, I think.

> Are you just overlooking the encoding attribute in the ComputedId connector? 

I was!

Thanks, for some reason it did not occur to me to look at the
documentation for "new" config parameters... My bad.

It's now working as expected, with persistent NameIDs unchanged and
adding pairwise via the resolver, v2-style but with base32-encoding.
That last bit was all I was missing.

The resulting strings are all upper-case (contrary to the
recommendation in the SubjectID spec, lines 137-138 in WD04), does
that warrant filing an issue (when the whole point was to define them


More information about the users mailing list