Subject: RE: Level of Assurance?

From: "Paul Rabinovich" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 10:25:03 -0400

Sam,

	I see this as a 2-step process:

1) Develop a protocol-independent framework/model (may be it's SAML 2.0
auth contexts with some bells and whistles).

2) Develop bindings for Kerb.

	I'm willing to write draft(s) for both. I can start on this
around Aug 15 and get the 0th draft out by mid-September.

	Regards,
	PR

-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Hartman [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 5:22 PM
To: Paul Rabinovich
Cc: Larry Zhu; Douglas E. Engert; Jeffrey Hutzelman; [email-masked]
Subject: Level of Assurance?

>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Rabinovich <[email-masked]> writes:

    Paul> 	Larry,

    Paul> 	In my view the problem is not Kerberos-specific and
    Paul> should be solved as such. Kerberos WG could provide Kerberos
    Paul> bindings/encodings for the generic solution. One possible
    Paul> seed for the actual solution is the work on Authentication
    Paul> Contexts in SAML 2.0 done by OASIS. My feeling is that it
    Paul> doesn't fully address the issue (although it provides an
    Paul> extension mechanism) but it may be a good start.

Would you be willing to write a draft showing how this could be bound to
Kerberos?

---

From: Leif Johansson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 23:00:44 +0200

> auth contexts with some bells and whistles).
This would make it a good topic for tonights bar-bof...

    Cheers Leif