[VOTE] Portable Identifier Support Proposal (patch)

[Martin Atkins]

Dick Hardt wrote:
> 
> Complexity: There is no reason for the RP to be managing the binding  
> between the IdP and the portable identifier. Both the IdP and the RP  
> are verifying this. There is no extra security, and more things to go  
> wrong in an implementation.
> 

You keep stating that both the RP and the IdP are verifying this, but 
under 1.1 at least this is not the case: the RP verifies the delegation, 
and the IdP is completely unaware of it. There is no need for the IdP to 
verify the delegation, since the RP will only harm itself if it fails to 
verify the relationship correctly.