That's true, but practice (at least in our community) has moved on. The
semantics of ePTID and CUI are in practice similar.
Having said that, I certainly agree that it would be good to get practice
around identifiers documented and deployed consistently for Moonshot. I
was hoping that we could use experience from the pilot to guide this.
Josh.
On 10/04/2014 13:22, "Matthew Vernon" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>On 10/04/14 13:11, Stefan Paetow wrote:
>>> its is the same service, at same site and same user (based on inner
>>> user ID) then it stays the same. no time domain
>>
>> Unless, for operational reasons, the hashing mechanism changes (i.e.
>> switching from MD5 in FR 2.2.x to SHA-1 in 3.0.x).
>
>The documentation for CUI (i.e. RFC4372) clearly views it as a temporary
>identity, that might well change based on billing cycles, and so on
>"When the home network assigns a value to the CUI, it asserts that
>this value represents a user in the home network. The assertion
>should be temporary -- long enough to be useful for the external
>applications and not too long such that it can be used to identify
>the user."
>
>Matthew
Janet(UK) is a trading name of Jisc Collections and Janet Limited, a
not-for-profit company which is registered in England under No. 2881024
and whose Registered Office is at Lumen House, Library Avenue,
Harwell Oxford, Didcot, Oxfordshire. OX11 0SG. VAT No. 614944238
|