Or continue using BitBucket without a custom domain. I'm all for tools, but
mercurial.openid.net versus bitbucket.com/openid doesn't feel like a large
difference.


On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Dick Hardt <[email protected]> wrote:

> While I am a fan of using tools to simplify our lives, I am concerned that
> we have setup a number of tools that seemed like a good idea and did not get
> utilized.
> I am fearful that community members will spend time on a new tool, only to
> be disappointed in lack of use.
>
> How about we just use the wiki we have now to create a document we can all
> edit?
>
> -- Dick
>
> On 2010-05-24, at 7:24 PM, Nat Sakimura wrote:
>
> > There are various plans, but since OIDF is primarily operating in public,
> > I should think that "Amateur" plan would suffice. It is US$5/mo.
> > The limitation is that it can only have one private repository,
> > but that should be ok.
> >
> > =nat
> >
> > (2010/05/25 1:56), Brian Kissel wrote:
> >> What is the cost? The Tech Committee has some budget.
> >>
> >> 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: Monday, May 24, 2010 8:05 AM
> >> To: Johannes Ernst
> >> Cc: OpenID Specs Mailing List
> >> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] OpenID v.Next Discovery Working Group Proposal
> >>
> >> Good idea.
> >>
> >> I can setup a project under bitbucket.org/openid/ (shall we upgrade to
> >> non-free version
> >> so that we get it under openid.net?) and it has a rudimentary bug
> >> tracking system.
> >> It can be used by logging in by OpenID.
> >>
> >> =nat
> >>
> >> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Johannes Ernst
> >> <[email protected]>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Allen, combining what you just wrote with what Brian said on the board
> >>> mailing list about MRDs -- perhaps it would make sense to set up a "bug
> >>> tracking system" of some kind and use that to drive spec evolution?
> >>> On May 23, 2010, at 18:56, Allen Tom wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Johannes,
> >>>
> >>> There isn't a document summarizing the deficiencies with OpenID 2.0
> >>> discovery - I think it would be very useful for the WG and for the
> >>>
> >> Community
> >>
> >>> if we wrote this down
> >>>
> >>> Off the top of my head, some of the problems are:
> >>>
> >>> Yadis discovery is very vague as to exactly how the RP is supposed to
> >>>
> >> fetch
> >>
> >>> the OP's discovery document. Should it send the magic Accept header?
> >>>
> >> Look
> >>
> >>> for the X-XRDS-Location header in the response? Do HTML discovery? In
> >>> practice, many implementers have had problems implementing discovery
> >>>
> >> because
> >>
> >>> there are too many ways to do it
> >>> Speaking of Yadis, the specs need to be revised, and it's unclear how
> to
> >>>
> >> go
> >>
> >>> about doing this
> >>> Because a compromised discovery document can result in the complete
> >>> breakdown in OpenID security - it's important that we find ways to
> >>>
> >> increase
> >>
> >>> the security of discovery - perhaps it can be signed? Moved into DNS?
> >>> Discovery is hard to implement - the majority of the code in OpenID
> >>> libraries is to implement discovery. We can probably simplify discovery
> >>>
> >> to
> >>
> >>> require less code to implement
> >>> Delegation is a really useful feature in OpenID - it was pretty
> >>> straightforward in OpenID 1.1, but is very confusing (to say the least)
> >>>
> >> in
> >>
> >>> OpenID 2.0 - we can probably do something in discovery to make
> >>>
> >> delegation
> >>
> >>> work better
> >>> The infamous NASCAR problem could possibly be helped by discovery
> >>> The infamous phishing problem could also possibly be helped by
> discovery
> >>> LRDD, host-meta, and webfinger are pretty interesting - we should see
> >>>
> >> how
> >>
> >>> OpenID can leverage these new specs
> >>>
> >>> I'm sure that there are more issues with OpenID 2.0 discovery. Anyone
> >>>
> >> else
> >>
> >>> want to take a stab at it?
> >>>
> >>> Allen
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 5/21/10 7:55 PM, "Johannes Ernst"<[email protected]>
> >>>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On May 21, 2010, at 19:28, Allen Tom wrote:
> >>>
> >>> ... there's universal consensus that the existing OpenID 2.0 discovery
> >>> mechanism is very deficient ...
> >>>
> >>> Is there a summary somewhere of this "universal consensus" of
> >>>
> >> deficiencies?
> >>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Johannes Ernst
> >>> NetMesh Inc.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> specs mailing list
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Nat Sakimura ([email protected])
> > Nomura Research Institute, Ltd.
> > Tel:+81-3-6274-1412 Fax:+81-3-6274-1547
> >
> >
> 本メールに含まれる情報は機密情報であり、宛先に記載されている方のみに送信することを意図しております。意図された受取人以外の方によるこれらの情報の開示、複製、再配布や転送など一切の利用が禁止されています。誤って本メールを受信された場合は、申し訳ございませんが、送信者までお知らせいただき、受信されたメールを削除していただきますようお願い致します。
> > PLEASE READ:
> > The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and intended for
> the named recipient(s) only.
> > If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby
> notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this
> message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error,
> please notify the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > specs mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
>
> _______________________________________________
> specs mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
>
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs

Reply via email to