Assuming I understand things correctly, it seems like what we're calling a canonical URL in this thread is really a pseudo-canonical URL since a given OpenID's XRDS doc is what specifies the Canonical ID.
If in 50 years, a given canonical URL domain goes away, then couldn't a given OpenId URL owner simply specify a new Canonical URL in his XRDS doc? If so, then It seems like there's almost a (in a good way) circular reference going on, since at certain points in time, what we're calling the "Canonical URL" is the unchanging/stable/authoritative URL, while at other times, the actual OpenID is the authoritative/unchanging/stable URL. In this setup, I a given person has to control 2 URL's at the same time in order to assert ownership of a given OpenID, making it difficult to lose your Identity if you lose only a single domain. In this respect, each URL provides a safeguard against the loss of the other URL. On 6/8/07, Dick Hardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You are still trusting one registry. Of course it is your choice, but you have a single point of failure. Do you think they will still be around in 50 years? On 8-Jun-07, at 4:20 PM, Recordon, David wrote: > I don't see how it requires a centralized registry, if I choose to > trust > that LiveJournal, or some ugly URL from AOL, etc will never go away > then > that is my choice. > > --David > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Dick Hardt > Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 4:08 PM > To: Drummond Reed > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Do We Agree on the Problem We're Trying to Solve? > > > On 8-Jun-07, at 4:00 PM, Drummond Reed wrote: > >> >>>> Drummond Reed wrote: >>>> >>>> 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. >>> >>> Dick Hardt wrote: >>> >>> The persistent URL or XRI *is* a master directory. What do you do >>> when the persistent identifier is compromised, goes out of >>> business ... >>> >>> That is problem B. >>> >>> Canonical IDs do not solve B. >> >> I completely agree that B is a hard problem. However Canonical IDs >> solve B >> if the identifier authority for the Canonical ID follows business and >> operational practices intended to solve B. > > And I think there is a solution that does not require a single, > central registry. > > One of the other issues with the registry is it is challenging to > provide directed identities. > > -- Dick > > _______________________________________________ > specs mailing list > [email protected] > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs > > _______________________________________________ specs mailing list [email protected] http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
_______________________________________________ specs mailing list [email protected] http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
