Arrgh! I'm horrible with names. See below for corrected text.
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 4:03 PM, John Ehn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Josh,
>
> I'm tending to agree with Martin on this one. I guess that statement does,
> in a roundabout way, implies the Relying P
cause more harm than good.
Thank you,
John Ehn
extremeswank.com
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 3:20 PM, Josh Hoyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Martin Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > * The RP, when verifying that the openid.claimed_id UR
Dick,
Thank you for the quick response. I'll ensure axschema.org is the default,
then.
Thanks,
John Ehn
extremeswank.com
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 7:23 PM, Dick Hardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 1-May-08, at 9:16 AM, John Ehn wrote:
>
> OpenID Colleagues,
>
&
l me which
one is now considered the standard implementation, so I don't have to build
three Attribute Exchange schema definition sets into my codebase?
Thank you,
John Ehn
extremeswank.com
___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
I agree. I think this is an excellent technology demonstration, but it is a
third-party, not Google, that is enabling the ID.
John
2008/4/9 Immad Akhund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> When Google eventually does make a proper OpenID provider all the OpenIDs
> provided by openid-provider.appspot.com wou
the XRDS document to advertise
that the OpenID Server supported a specific version of the spec. Since
OpenID 2.0 incorporates the XRI feature (which was a sort of "third-party
add-on" to the OpenID 1.x spec), that namespace is still used.
But, like James said, you shouldn't use openid
,
John Ehn
extremeswank.com
On 3/12/08, techtonik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> What is the difference between OpenID authentication version 1.0 and 1.1?
> We need some arguments to switch preferable backwards compatibility scheme
> from 1.0 to 1.1 in Drupal. Looks
James,
Considering that the majority of the individuals and organizations that have
created the OpenID libraries do not have access to vast sums of cash to pay
for these applications or services, do you recommend any analysis software
that is low cost or free?
Thanks,
John
extremeswank.com
On
is low-coupled takes SingleSingIn/LogOut into spec or not
> is very interesting issue. I would like to know how do subscribers
> think...
>
> --
> =katsuhara <http://xri.net/=katsuhara>
>
>
> John Ehn wrote:
> > I've posted a Draft 0 version to the OpenID Wiki.
certain review period, members get to vote.
> The quorum is greater of 20% of OIDF members or 20 OIDF members.
>
> Regards,
>
> =nat
>
> Brett Carter wrote:
> > John Ehn wrote:
> >
> >> Sounds good. I'm working on a draft. Once it's in a rea
I've posted a Draft 0 version to the OpenID Wiki. Please feel free to
comment and modify as needed.
http://wiki.openid.net/Federation_Extension
Thanks,
John
On 2/19/08, John Ehn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Brett,
>
> No formal process. All RFC through the m
Brett,
No formal process. All RFC through the mailing list.
Thanks,
John
On 2/19/08, Brett Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> John Ehn wrote:
> > Sounds good. I'm working on a draft. Once it's in a readable state,
> > I'll post it for comments
er idea than IFRAMES, in another post. They're more compatible, for
> one.
>
>
> A point I didn't think of at first is that we have the converse issue of
> being able to log out of federated sites as well.
> -Brett
>
>
>
> On Feb 18, 2008, at 11:58 AM, John Ehn w
Well, with some tweaking elsewhere. Hidden iframes are the smoothest way to
do it.
On 2/18/08, John Ehn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It was just an example. In theory, you could do it with an IMG or OBJECT
> tag.
>
> On 2/18/08, SignpostMarv Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&
It was just an example. In theory, you could do it with an IMG or OBJECT
tag.
On 2/18/08, SignpostMarv Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> John Ehn wrote:
> > 5. Each site's iframe performs regular OpenID authentication using
> > the identity info already cac
subscribing to the IsLoggedIn variable are updated using AX.
4. Each receiving site expires the user session.
Does this sound feasible?
On 2/18/08, John Ehn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This can be pretty easily done by piggy-backing on the Attribute Exchange
> extension.
ionality in the browser itself?
Thanks,
John Ehn
extremeswank.com
On 2/18/08, Martin Paljak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 18, 2008, at 5:11 PM, McGovern, James F (HTSC, IT) wrote:
> > Likewise, I would think that for automatic signon, it would be a good
> > thin
James,
It appears you possess a good amount of knowledge on this topic.
I believe that if you were to come up with some preliminary
implementation guidelines (and presented them here for review), you
would not be stepping on anyone's toes.
Thank you,
John Ehn
On Jan 25, 2008, at 3:
hanks!
John Ehn
extremeswank.com
On 10/29/07, James Henstridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 29/10/2007, John Ehn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I've been reviewing Draft 12, and noticed this section, which I think
> will
> > cause problems for some syste
at RP is
not accessible from the Internet.
If I'm wrong, please let me know.
Thank you,
John Ehn
extremeswank.com
___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
Joseph,
Any help you could provide to flesh out (or heavily modify) these specs
would be most appreciated.
Thanks,
John Ehn
extremeswank.com
On 10/22/07, Joseph Holsten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Wow, these are neat. Thanks for the links david, and especially the
> work j
e "fleshed out" in some
parts, though.
As for the Signature Request protocol, I'm not quite sure what it does yet,
but I'll let you know my opinion once I've digested it.
Thanks!
John
On 9/3/07, Martin Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> John Ehn wrote:
>
On 8/31/07, James Henstridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> You still want the user involved in the granting of an authentication
> token though, right? Trying to replace the "UA" in the authentication
> workflow is quite a big change, and limits what the OP can do.
Yes, granting the secret mu
Hans,
Yes, the Client App is expected to implement all the important parts of an
OpenID 2.0 Relying Party. This means it will support XRI, Yadis, and HTML
discovery.
It's unlikely systems will have clashing namespaces, but is possible (most
corporate user accounts don't begin with "=", "@", "+",
ation keys", which are provided
either as needed by the OpenID Provider, or provided on a rotating basis
from a hardware crypto device, or a key generating token (SecurID).
As always, your comments are appreciated!
Thank you,
John Ehn
___
specs ma
initiating a logon at the destination site. The destination site follows
the normal OpenID protocol to get an assertion from the OpenID Provider.
The two sites can then trade cookies, or keep track of query strings, or
whatever they want to manage their session.
On 8/31/07, John Ehn <[EMAIL P
he user will have
to log on to the destination site to invalidate the token. What if the user
has 50 of these API connections set up? That's 50 sites to visit in order
to manage these tokens.
Like I said, nothing technically wrong with the idea (it's novel), but it
just doesn't fit with
Ahhh, I see what you're going for. It's a very interesting idea.
On 8/30/07, James Henstridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 30/08/2007, John Ehn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > James,
> >
> > Sorry, but I'm having problems following the f
cting
their own data (Telnet, etc). This will involve manually-typed verification
keys.
* Desktop Authentication - Provide for desktop applications
authenticating with and accessing data behind third-party systems (RSS
readers, chat, etc).
I appreciate any feedback you can give me.
Thank you!
John E
be very happy. If not, I will still be happy.
I am passionate about OpenID. I feel that if I want it succeed, I should
work to extend it, and I should have the freedom to do so.
Thank you,
John Ehn
On 8/29/07, Chris Messina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
>
http://extremeswank.com/openid_trusted_auth.html
Thank you,
John Ehn
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
31 matches
Mail list logo
