Error unmarshalling message from input stream

[Steven Premeau]

I guess it's been a bit longer than I thought since the topic has been on
the list.

I won't try to recreate the thread, but suffice it to say that requesting
"urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.1:nameid-format:unspecified" in the request is a
waste of the characters, simply not including a Format attribute is the
correct approach.

And if the SP is one of the very few that "requires" that format in the
response, it would be another indication that their SAML2 implementation
does not conform to the standard.

Steve.

On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 7:43 PM Mohamed Lrhazi <lrhazi at cua.edu> wrote:

> Oh, and if you get a chance, could you please point me to some more info
> about :
>
> > t *(and you can search the list archives for comments about requesting
> an unspecified nameid format)*:
>
> I think you are saying this SP is doing something wrong regarding NAMEID
> format? I tried to search, but am not sure what I should be searching for.
>
> Thanks a lot,
> Mohamed.
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 7:07 PM Mohamed Lrhazi <lrhazi at cua.edu> wrote:
>
>> That seems to have worked! Thanks a lot Steve.
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 5:14 PM Steven Premeau <steven.premeau at maine.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have not needed to override the property, but my first attempt based
>>> on that release note item would be to add it to idp.properties.
>>>  Ultimately, if it works, it's it least *A* right place.
>>>
>>> Steve.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 4:31 PM Mohamed Lrhazi <lrhazi at cua.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks Steven. Do you know how do I
>>>> set opensaml.config.xml.unmarshall.strictMode to false? is that in
>>>> idp.properties ?
>>>>
>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://shibboleth.net/pipermail/users/attachments/20241027/97ccaed5/attachment.htm>