Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

edugain-discuss - Re: [eduGAIN-discuss] [refeds] 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] 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] mari plan & next steps
  • Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 17:39:39 +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

* Leif Johansson <leifj AT sunet.se> [2014-10-29 17:34]:
> If R&S specifies releasing eduPersonScopedAffiliation and FEIDE doesn't
> have that attribute, how will including it in a bundle help FEIDE?

That's probably my point: It won't help FEIDE per se, it would force
FEIDE to align its practices with the spec IFF they wanted to be able
to apply to (SPs) or support (IDPs) REFEDS R&S.

I.e., I wouldn't want to weaken the harmonization brought about by
having standardized attribute bundles by making them refer to
meta-attributes instead.

Hence my question how this effort relates to REFEDS R&S.
-peter





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

Top of Page