;) On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 4:00 AM, David Recordon <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't think that it makes sense to only pull it into the Artifact Binding > Working Group, but do want to collaborate. :) > > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Nat Sakimura <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Thanks David, >> >> and you can contribute "connect" draft to the Artifact Binding WG as well >> ;-). >> >> That will save a lot of time for you as well if you and I can move >> quickly enough to adjust the differences and clarify the text. Then, >> by the end of May, "connect" is out of the door for the public review. >> (True, the discovery portion may be a bit out of scope but if Y! and >> G. are OK, rest of us are OK, I think.) >> >> =nat >> >> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 3:45 AM, David Recordon <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Inline... >> > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Nat Sakimura <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi Dewitt, >> >> >> >> Since I am not a marketing type, I may not have been communicating it >> >> properly. >> >> I got a lot of positive criticism around it during IIW X, but the OIDF >> >> chartered WG, >> >> "Artifact Binding" Working Group is producing OAuth2.0-- binding of >> >> OpenID Assertions. >> >> >> >> The spec has gone through 6 draft specs, and you can find it here: >> >> >> >> https://openid4.us/specs/ab/ ("OpenID for us", not ver. 4 :-) >> >> >> >> >From what I see, it is kind of close to what proposed OpenID Connect >> >> would do. >> >> It lacks some features like webfinger support (which I expected v.Next >> >> Discovery >> >> WG would sort out), cookie generation, etc., but they can also be >> >> added in, I suppose. >> >> It is kind of unfortunate that though I like those features of the >> >> connect proposal, >> >> I cannot incorporate them because I have read them and these are not >> >> contributed to OIDF yet. >> > >> > I currently plan to contribute the Connect proposal into an OpenID >> > Foundation Working Group. If that's undesired then I'll remove "OpenID" >> > from >> > the name and continue working on it elsewhere. >> > >> >> >> >> Artifact Binding does other things that connect proposal does not: it >> >> supports mobile handsets as well as higher level of assurance.David >> >> might be thinking that these are >> >> redundant features, but they are very useful in commerce etc. setting >> >> and all these public key crypto (actually, any crypto for that matter) >> >> things are optional. >> > >> > I don't think that they are redundant. Mobile is really important and >> > I'm >> > glad that you held the session on Artifact Binding at IIW so that I >> > could >> > learn more about the limitations within that sort of environment! >> > It's not said enough, but Nat you've really been the only one making >> > technical progress within the Foundation the past six months and that >> > progress is a good thing. >> > >> >> >> >> I am planning to freeze the draft latest by the end of May. >> >> >> >> For expediting the process of getting "connect" like features out, >> >> it might be better to utilize this WG as a conduit instead, >> >> and still we can message the market that we are producing a >> >> single version of the OpenID 3. >> >> >> >> Just my 2c. >> >> >> >> =nat >> >> >> >> P.S. I plan to contribute openid4.us to OIDF. I just needed it to get >> >> SSL cert to demonstrate Artifact Binding at IIW. What would be the >> >> process? >> >> >> >> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:45 AM, DeWitt Clinton <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > From where I'm sitting, I see them as mutually compatible and >> >> > parallel >> >> > goals, but not now the same technology, and that's okay. >> >> > Connect being "build on what the web is already doing and very much >> >> > wants/needs today", and v.Next being "what could be done given the >> >> > luxury of >> >> > time to explore." >> >> > The OIDF could make an effort to wait for the latter to build the >> >> > former, >> >> > but honestly, the former isn't going to wait for the OIDF. Which is >> >> > why >> >> > I >> >> > advocate a parallel approach if we hope to see the OIDF involved (and >> >> > I >> >> > do). >> >> > >> >> > Please correct my understanding of the situation if I got the above >> >> > wrong, >> >> > as I'm only following the discussions from the edges and I'm >> >> > (blissfully) >> >> > out of the loop. >> >> > -DeWitt >> >> > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Brian Kissel <[email protected]> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> +1 to Nat's suggestion. While we know that both David and Joseph >> >> >> are >> >> >> very >> >> >> well qualified to lead this committee, if we do have differing >> >> >> perspectives on the future direction of the next iterations of >> >> >> OpenID, >> >> >> it >> >> >> would be good to have representatives from both perspectives >> >> >> involved >> >> >> in >> >> >> leading the process. >> >> >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> >> >> >> Brian >> >> >> ___________ >> >> >> >> >> >> Brian Kissel >> >> >> CEO - JanRain, Inc. >> >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> Mobile: 503.342.2668 | Fax: 503.296.5502 >> >> >> 519 SW 3rd Ave. Suite 600 Portland, OR 97204 >> >> >> >> >> >> Increase registrations, engage users, and grow your brand with RPX. >> >> >> Learn >> >> >> more at www.rpxnow.com >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> >> From: [email protected] >> >> >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nat >> >> >> Sakimura >> >> >> Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 12:09 AM >> >> >> To: [email protected] >> >> >> Subject: Re: [OpenID board] Technical Committee Chairs >> >> >> >> >> >> I have a little concern here. It might be a healthy thing to have >> >> >> discussions, but in the end, I really want v.Next and Connect camp >> >> >> to >> >> >> unite. In that respect, both chair and co-chair coming from Connect >> >> >> camp bothers me. >> >> >> >> >> >> You say that Joseph was close to be a co-chair, but the situation >> >> >> surrounding it has changed since then. At the time, there was only >> >> >> v.Next. Now, it looks like there are v.Next and Connect camp. >> >> >> >> >> >> Do not you think it is better to first ask v.Next camp people to >> >> >> step >> >> >> up? >> >> >> >> >> >> Would not somebody form v.Next camp step up? >> >> >> >> >> >> =nat >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:23 PM, David Recordon >> >> >> <[email protected]> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > The committee elects its own chairs. A few months ago we elected >> >> >> > Dick >> >> >> > as >> >> >> > chair and me as co-chair. Joseph was really close to being >> >> >> > co-chair. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Nat Sakimura >> >> >> > <[email protected]> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> So, what is the process that chooses committee chairs? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:01 PM, David Recordon >> >> >> >> <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > Today the Board passed a resolution directing the Executive >> >> >> >> > Director, >> >> >> >> > Chair, >> >> >> >> > Technical Committee, and outside council to explore a >> >> >> >> > contracting >> >> >> >> > relationship with Dick Hardt to move the v.Next work forward. >> >> >> >> > Dick >> >> >> >> > brought >> >> >> >> > up how there could be a conflict during this process given that >> >> >> >> > he >> >> >> >> > is >> >> >> >> > the >> >> >> >> > chair of the Technical Committee. So for the time being I'll >> >> >> >> > take >> >> >> >> > on >> >> >> the >> >> >> >> > chair role with Joseph Smarr (who wasn't at the meeting but I >> >> >> >> > spoke >> >> >> to a >> >> >> >> > few >> >> >> >> > hours ago) taking on the co-chair role. >> >> >> >> > Technical Committee, expect a followup email around starting to >> >> >> >> > pull >> >> >> >> > together a set of deliverables and timeline over the next week. >> >> >> >> > The >> >> >> >> > goal, as >> >> >> >> > I understand it, is to either have a contract in place or a >> >> >> >> > determination >> >> >> >> > that it is unfeasible by the end of the this month. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > Thanks, >> >> >> >> > --David >> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> > board mailing list >> >> >> >> > [email protected] >> >> >> >> > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> Nat Sakimura (=nat) >> >> >> >> http://www.sakimura.org/en/ >> >> >> >> http://twitter.com/_nat_en >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> board mailing list >> >> >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> >> > board mailing list >> >> >> > [email protected] >> >> >> > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Nat Sakimura (=nat) >> >> >> http://www.sakimura.org/en/ >> >> >> http://twitter.com/_nat_en >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> board mailing list >> >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> board mailing list >> >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > board mailing list >> >> > [email protected] >> >> > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Nat Sakimura (=nat) >> >> http://www.sakimura.org/en/ >> >> http://twitter.com/_nat_en >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> board mailing list >> >> [email protected] >> >> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > board mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board >> > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Nat Sakimura (=nat) >> http://www.sakimura.org/en/ >> http://twitter.com/_nat_en >> _______________________________________________ >> board mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board > > > _______________________________________________ > board mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board > >
-- Nat Sakimura (=nat) http://www.sakimura.org/en/ http://twitter.com/_nat_en _______________________________________________ board mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board
