Re: [liberty-dev] ResourceID Question

From Jonathan Sergent <sergent@Sun.COM>
Date Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:52:19 -0700
In-reply-to < >

On Friday, Oct 24, 2003, at 04:43 US/Pacific, Conor P. Cahill wrote:

Either the ResourceID, or it could be implied by the security token in the header.  For example if I go to a web site, say and use ID-FF to authenticate.  When accesses my profile using a security token generated off of the SSO environment, the profile service will be able to see that it is I who is sitting in front of and that I am the one who's profile is being accessed.  In such a case, the ResourceID can be set to "...-implied".  

Note that this approach is valid, but only if you are using the directives with the DS such that security tokens are generated and returned and the user's identity can be retrieved from the SessionContext, and only if you have a single profile service per user per provider. (This is a reasonable assumption for the profile service but it may not be reasonable for any and all services. As an example, if you were to define a calendar service, you might want to have two calendars for the user, one for home and one for work. Rather than make the calendar service understand the difference between home and work, you could just have two registrations in the discovery service and use option flags to help you pick the right one to access. They could very well both be on the same web service provider.)

Jonathan Sergent


If you would like to unsubscribe from this list, please click on the URL 

The Liberty Alliance liberty-dev mail list archive can be viewed at the following URL:

Partial thread listing:

Re: [liberty-dev] ResourceID Question(continued)
 Jonathan Sergent (10/24/2003)
 Jonathan Sergent (10/24/2003)
 John Kemp (10/24/2003)
Re: [[liberty-dev] Liberty Alliance Question](IGOR IVANOV)
[liberty-dev] Liberty Alliance Question


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here