Skip to Content.

edugain-discuss - Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] [refeds] Re: mari plan & next steps

edugain-discuss AT lists.geant.org

Subject: An open discussion list for topics related to the eduGAIN interfederation service.

List archive


Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] [refeds] Re: mari plan & next steps


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Peter Schober <peter.schober AT univie.ac.at>
  • To: REFEDS <refeds AT terena.org>, "edugain-discuss AT geant.net" <edugain-discuss AT geant.net>
  • Subject: Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] [refeds] Re: mari plan & next steps
  • Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 16:49:43 +0100
  • Authentication-results: prod-mail.geant.net (amavisd-new); dkim=pass header.i= AT univie.ac.at
  • List-archive: <https://mail.geant.net/mailman/private/edugain-discuss/>
  • List-id: eduGAIN discussion list <edugain-discuss.geant.net>
  • Organization: ACOnet

* Jaime Pérez Crespo <jaime.perez AT uninett.no> [2014-10-29 16:39]:
> This is a good example. You definitely cannot expect
> schacHomeOrganization to exist if you are talking to Feide. Same
> applies to eduPersonScopedAffiliation, for instance.

I should have left out schac* :) and I didn't mean to say that those
will always be available. (The only reason I had them on my
documentatio was that the TCS Personal Portal requires it.)

A federation where no IDP can produce eduPersonScopedAffiliation I
find very curious, indeed. But how would a meta-attribute name give me
an equivalent for ePSA? Are you saying there's an exact equivalent
available in Norway, including the same controlled vocabulary for the
LHS of ePSA, and scope-requirement for the RHS? So basically ePSA
verbatim, only using another name?
So I'm not saying it's all good and in harmony, just that I don't it's
just a mapping problem.

But I hear you all and if you feel that this is an issue where you
think progress could be made, I'm all for it!
I'm always +1 for one more level of meta. :)
-peter





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

Top of Page