Multiple, redundant identifiers is what canonical ID mapping provides. It doesn't require a master directory; it's as distributed as OpenID itself, i.e., it simply provides a way to map a reassignable URL or XRI to a persistent URL or XRI.
Given the right practices, it solves both A and B. The cost can be, as Josh points out, an extra round trip on discovery. However this can be avoided for certain pairs of the reassignable and persistent identifiers. See my next reply to Josh's message. =Drummond -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dick Hardt Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 12:33 PM To: Johannes Ernst Cc: specs@openid.net Subject: Re: Do We Agree on the Problem We're Trying to Solve? Multiple, redundant identifiers solves B without requiring a master directory. On 8-Jun-07, at 11:06 AM, Johannes Ernst wrote: > Such as? > > On Jun 8, 2007, at 10:55, Dick Hardt wrote: > >> There are ways to solve B that don't really solve A. >> >> In fact, I think the only way to solve B that does not require a >> master directory is orthogonal to solving A. >> >> -- Dick >> >> On 8-Jun-07, at 10:49 AM, Johannes Ernst wrote: >> >>> I would suggest that any solution to B is also very likely a >>> solution to A. >>> >>> Anybody disagree? >>> >>> If so, I'd suggest that we should either solve A and B at the same >>> time, or not at all. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jun 8, 2007, at 10:42, Dick Hardt wrote: >>> >>>> At IIW we[1] decided we wanted to solve (A) and that (B) would be >>>> nice to solve, but we were ok to wait for a future version to >>>> resolve, as when we discussed (B), resolving looked much harder >>>> then >>>> it seemed at first. >>>> >>>> I'm not certain of where we are now. >>>> >>>> -- Dick >>>> >>>> [1] those present when we met about how to solve recycling ... >>>> >>>> On 8-Jun-07, at 10:35 AM, Recordon, David wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'm not sure if we all think we're trying to solve the same >>>>> problem. >>>>> The two problems that have been discussed are: >>>>> A) Identifier recycling normally in large user-base deployments. >>>>> i.e. >>>>> <insert big company> needs a way to give 'TheBestUsernameEver' >>>>> to a >>>>> new >>>>> user if it has not been used in some period of time. >>>>> B) Losing control of your own domain name whether that be via >>>>> someone >>>>> stealing it or just that you don't want to have to pay for it >>>>> forever. >>>>> >>>>> Have we made a decision as to if we're looking for a solution to >>>>> solve >>>>> both of these problems, only A, or only B? >>>>> >>>>> --David >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> specs mailing list >>>>> specs@openid.net >>>>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> specs mailing list >>>> specs@openid.net >>>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> specs mailing list >> specs@openid.net >> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs > > _______________________________________________ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs _______________________________________________ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
