[OpenID] No benefits of XRI i-names/i-numbers as OpenIDs (was:isopenid 2.0 a lightweight identity system?)

David Fuelling sappenin at gmail.com
Tue Feb 13 14:55:53 UTC 2007

> -----Original Message-----
> From: general-bounces at openid.net [mailto:general-bounces at openid.net] On
> Behalf Of Dmitry Shechtman
> So please don't make simple things complicated, i-names could be easily
> support using idproxy.net like proxy, we don't need it in the core OpenID
> spec.
> There's nothing wrong with OpenID resolving i-names to http://xri.net/
> URIs. Since there is a proxy there already, it should simply handle the
> rest.

Sorry if this has been answered, but isn't http://xri.net an endpoint for a
registrar? (i.e., there could be competitors to xri.net)?

If this is true, the above is a bit like saying, "the openid spec should
simply perform URL resolution using Verisign's DNS directory".  

Why should the OpenId spec coronate a given vendor/endpoint?  A "good" spec
should be more agnostic (like it is now).

More information about the general mailing list