-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of John C Klensin
Sent: Sun 3/1/2009 10:12 PM
To: Patrik Fältström; Dave CROCKER
Cc: Hannes Tschofenig; ietf@ietf.org; Lynn St. Amour; dai...@isoc.org
Subject: Re: Internet Society joins Liberty Alliance Management Board: Why?
Patrik,
I fear that I need to side
So at this point the rule in the identity space is safety in numbers. The
major waring factions are now spending considerable
time and effort to show that the war is over and there is going to be a
concerted joint effort. Thus ISOC joining liberty does not represent the
IETF taking sides in a
On Mar 1, 2009, at 9:04 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
At Sun, 1 Mar 2009 19:59:00 +0200,
Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
As you might have noticed, the WebSSO Identity Management space is
not
running out of organizations and groups. Someone could, for
example, come up
with the question why ISOC did
On 1 mrt 2009, at 23:49, Lynn St.Amour wrote:
PS. Re: your side note below on the makeup of the ISOC Board, we'll
update the list to show the community or mechanism that appoints/
elects Trustees. In the meantime, the IETF appoints 3 Trustees
(out of 13, 12 voting and me non-voting).
To: Hannes Tschofenig
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Internet Society joins Liberty Alliance
Management Board: Why?
On Sat, 28 Feb 2009, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
I would like to hear a bit more background about these
activities, see
https://www.projectliberty.org/news_events/press_releases
the impression that everything was going fine.
Obviously not quite ...
Ciao
Hannes
Ciao
Hannes
-Original Message-
From: Lucy Lynch [mailto:lly...@civil-tongue.net]
Sent: 01 March, 2009 19:30
To: Hannes Tschofenig
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Internet Society joins Liberty Alliance
Hannes
Ciao
Hannes
-Original Message-
From: Lucy Lynch [mailto:lly...@civil-tongue.net]
Sent: 01 March, 2009 19:30
To: Hannes Tschofenig
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Internet Society joins Liberty Alliance Management
Board: Why?
On Sat, 28 Feb 2009, Hannes Tschofenig wrote
At 9:35 PM +0200 3/2/09, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
I find it somewhat interesting that we would perceive the ISOC
as being responsible to the IETF in this regard.
Responsible is not the right term. A bit better synchronized would be nice.
ISOC has multiple staff members at every IETF, and those
On Sat, 28 Feb 2009, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
I would like to hear a bit more background about these activities, see
https://www.projectliberty.org/news_events/press_releases/internet_society_j
oins_liberty_alliance_management_board
Hannes -
ISOC hat on
As stated in the press release, ISOC
in this space?
Ciao
Hannes
-Original Message-
From: Lucy Lynch [mailto:lly...@civil-tongue.net]
Sent: 01 March, 2009 19:30
To: Hannes Tschofenig
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Internet Society joins Liberty Alliance
Management Board: Why?
On Sat, 28 Feb 2009, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
I would
Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
Someone could, for example, come up
with the question why ISOC did not join the MIT Kerberos Consortium (see
http://www.kerberos.org/), as Kerberos is a technology developed within the
IETF, or to support technologies like OpenID, OAuth, etc. that are closer to
...@civil-tongue.net]
Sent: 01 March, 2009 19:30
To: Hannes Tschofenig
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Internet Society joins Liberty Alliance
Management Board: Why?
On Sat, 28 Feb 2009, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
I would like to hear a bit more background about these
activities, see
https
Dave,
On 2009-03-02 07:17, Dave CROCKER wrote:
...
What is particularly interesting to me, about this line of comment, is
not whether the relevant IETF-based technologies are superior or whether
Can you point me to the IETF WG(s) that are considering identity
management as a whole? I know
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Dave,
On 2009-03-02 07:17, Dave CROCKER wrote:
...
What is particularly interesting to me, about this line of comment, is
not whether the relevant IETF-based technologies are superior or whether
Can you point me to the IETF WG(s) that are considering identity
On 2009-03-02 10:21, Dave CROCKER wrote:
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Dave,
On 2009-03-02 07:17, Dave CROCKER wrote:
...
What is particularly interesting to me, about this line of comment, is
not whether the relevant IETF-based technologies are superior or whether
Can you point me to the
Brian
Taking a loose view of the OSI 7 layer stack for a moment - is there
any group that's looking at more than 3 layers?
Identity, as you know, can be at layer2 for link access sign on (the
IEEE is addressing this area).
There's identity associated to an IP address.
There's identity
On 1 mar 2009, at 22.21, Dave CROCKER wrote:
In any event, if it something ISOC considers worth making a
strategic relationship about, and it is likely to entail Internet
technical standards, then it would be strange to have the IETF skip
dealing with it.
As Lycy said, we in ISOC BoT do
Patrik Fältström wrote:
So I do not think IETF should be the slightest worried ISOC is doing
something here without coordination. And without visibility to the IETF.
I don't know about anyone else, but I wasn't expressing worry. I was noting
that the activity wasn't discussed with the
snip
So I do not think IETF should be the slightest worried ISOC is doing
something here without coordination. And without visibility to the IETF.
And the more people in IETF is interested on this more meta-level-work
than bits on the wire, the higher the quality will be of the work ISOC
My concern regarding this announcement is the fact that it gives support to a
misguided effort by Liberty Alliance. I think it is somewhat irresponsible for
the ISOC to actively support an effort without first engaging the community at
large to fully understand the dynamics of the identity
On 2 mar 2009, at 04.12, John C Klensin wrote:
I am not suggesting trying to undo this decision, but believe
that, as ISOC adds sufficient technically-qualified staff to
engage in activities like this on its own, we need to work,
collectively, on better ways to facilitate communication in a
Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
I would like to hear a bit more background about these activities, see
https://www.projectliberty.org/news_events/press_releases/internet_society_j
oins_liberty_alliance_management_board
Hannes, that is a very good question. I look forward to clarification
from the
joins Liberty Alliance Management Board: Why?
Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
I would like to hear a bit more background about these activities, see
https://www.projectliberty.org/news_events/press_releases/internet_society_j
oins_liberty_alliance_management_board
Hannes, that is a very good
23 matches
Mail list logo
