+1 to defining attribute identifier URIs/XRIs in the Identity Commons ID
Schemas project.
=Drummond
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Recordon, David
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 1:16 PM
To: Johnny Bufu
Cc: OpenID specs list
Subject: RE:
Thursday, April 5, 2007, 5:43:02 AM, you wrote:
[snip]
DO> How these keys are handled internally could be left to the
DO> consumer or RP.
[snip]
This sounds like another *strong* use-case for updating the OpenID
protocol to allow transactions to take place when the user is not
present.
I am no
This was, of course, the original LID design, and you are presenting
the rationale for it.
See http://lid.netmesh.org/
On Apr 4, 2007, at 20:59, Chris Drake wrote:
> Thursday, April 5, 2007, 5:43:02 AM, you wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> DO> How these keys are handled internally could be left to the
>
Thursday, April 5, 2007, 3:50:49 AM, Martin wrote:
MA> Chris Drake wrote:
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> You wrote
>> MA> The "age" of the information needs to be taken into account here.
>>
>> When the information (rightly) lives at the OP instead of the RP, none
>> of that age complexity exists.
>>
>> I
>Kevin Turner wrote:
>
>Sorry it took me a few months to notice this, but xri://$dns? No. I'm
>referring here to spec rev 274, the diff for which is attached. Can we
>roll that patch back, please?
>
>I'm not even sure where you're getting an XRI Syntax 2.1 reference from,
>there's not so much a
Sorry it took me a few months to notice this, but xri://$dns? No. I'm
referring here to spec rev 274, the diff for which is attached. Can we
roll that patch back, please?
I'm not even sure where you're getting an XRI Syntax 2.1 reference from,
there's not so much as a working draft of it publis
List,
I sat down with a couple other JanRain engineers and we took a look at
the Attribute Exchange draft and recorded some issues that we have.
There are probably other smaller issues, but this is what we came up
with in a quick (?) review.
Is editing of this spec by authors of other OpenID spec
Johnny,
I see a lot of, at least my initial confusion, coming from there being
multiple documents. This is why I urge merging the transport and
metadata since the reality is they currently are only being used with
each other. As the metadata document doesn't actually define a new
format, rather r
On Apr 4, 2007, at 7:43 PM, Douglas Otis wrote:
> Related services that can be enabled by using OpenID as a key
> distribution scheme. Keys would need to relate to services handled
> by the consumer or RP. A sub-attribute could help facilitate
> correct placement of the keys and to allow
On Apr 4, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Vinay Gupta wrote:
> On Apr 4, 2007, at 6:13 PM, Douglas Otis wrote:
>> There could be keys used to authorize some other automated
>> service, or to act as a replacement for OpenID once the key has
>> been established. One might be defined for email, IM, VoIP, et
On 4-Apr-07, at 12:18 PM, Recordon, David wrote:
> One thing that I do think would be worthwhile in smoothing more of
> this
> SREG/AX confusion would be adding SREG support to Sxip's OpenID
> libraries.
This is on the todo list, and judging by the interest showed by some
contributors could h
Hey Johnny,
I agree that you're doing a good job especially with your pre-draft 5
review message. Let's continue that way! There have been things in the
past, not that you've done, which have certainly rubbed me the wrong way
about AX. Does seem like we're all moving forward though with good
pro
David,
On 4-Apr-07, at 11:43 AM, Recordon, David wrote:
> - Cleanup the newly merged
> http://openid.net/specs/openid-attribute-exchange-1_0-04.html to be
> more
> concise and list URLs for the existing SREG parameters. This will
> thus
> show an easy "upgrade" path between SREG and AX.
I t
On Apr 4, 2007, at 6:13 PM, Douglas Otis wrote:
> This may seem to be off topic, but I really don't see reluctance in
> using public key cryptography. DKIM would be one such example.
> Nearly every gateway, and access point can utilize this means of
> authentication. Think of this as yet another
In some sense both, maybe it is just how the documents seem to be laid
out, it just doesn't seem as dead simple as SREG. Maybe it is just
reworking the layout of
http://openid.net/specs/openid-attribute-exchange-1_0-04.html and
removing the document about policy versus technology
http://openid.net
On Apr 4, 2007, at 12:45 AM, Martin Atkins wrote:
> Anders Feder wrote:
>>
>> Imagine an RP requesting your bank account number X from your OP.
>> Time
>> goes by, and your OP goes out of business. Later, you switch banks
>> and
>> your account number X is assigned to someone else. In the
>
Chris Drake wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> You wrote
> MA> The "age" of the information needs to be taken into account here.
>
> When the information (rightly) lives at the OP instead of the RP, none
> of that age complexity exists.
>
> It's *my* name. It's *my* credit card. If any RP wants this info,
As long as we're being ecumenical about platforms can we include
Shibboleth, i-name etc. along with OpenID in "user-centric identity"?
If so I am interested.
Wes Kussmaul
McGovern, James F (HTSC, IT) wrote:
Great to hear that you are working with salesforce.com. Would someone else on t
Great to hear that you are working with salesforce.com. Would someone else on
this list volunteer to work with Siebel, Peoplesoft, SAP, Intalio and Alfresco?
-Original Message-
From: Dick Hardt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 2:57 AM
To: McGovern, James F (HTSC,
Based on your response, it feels kinda soft in terms of large vendor
commitment. If we figure out how to get better collectively at marketing OpenID
especially at end-customers and why they need it, then we can get some
acceleration in terms of adoption. If you have specific names of folks at I
Hi Martin,
You wrote
MA> The "age" of the information needs to be taken into account here.
When the information (rightly) lives at the OP instead of the RP, none
of that age complexity exists.
It's *my* name. It's *my* credit card. If any RP wants this info, make
them come to me (my OP) and get
Anders Feder wrote:
>
> Imagine an RP requesting your bank account number X from your OP. Time
> goes by, and your OP goes out of business. Later, you switch banks and
> your account number X is assigned to someone else. In the meantime, the
> RP has been preparing a payment for a job you have
Recordon, David wrote:
> I see there being a gap between SREG and AX with nothing bridging it.
> IMHO, AX takes too large of a step for people to use it if they just
> want a few more SREG fields. I think we need something which does
> nothing more than provide a way to extend SREG and that will s
23 matches
Mail list logo
