[Openid-specs-risc] RISC Profile

Marius Scurtescu mscurtescu at google.com
Wed Sep 13 21:13:54 UTC 2017


On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Phil Hunt (IDM) <phil.hunt at oracle.com>
wrote:

> Oidf has its own publication process and template. Let me know if you need
> a copy. It uses the older xml2rfc converter.
>

Yes, please send me the template, or point me to it. Does this mean that we
should drop markdown and use only xml? I am fine with xml, just trying to
understand the constraints of the tool chain.

What does older version of xml2rfc mean?


> The life cycles are the same so i would just keep everything in one risc
> doc unless there is a good information or technical reason to separate
> (other then doc mgmt).
>

As Annabelle mentions, by having two separate specs allows us to have a
stable profile spec and a changing event type spec. I think that makes
sense.



>
> The IETF would not be a good place for the spec because most cases (at
> least the explicit cases) stem from OIDC use cases.
>

Agreed.



>
> The only reason it might be worth discussing at IETF is the implicit
> cases. That could be done as a new charter in Secevents.  But i think
> openid is fine unless this is something you feel all email providers need
> to consider supporting RISC.
>

IMO the only thing we could consider discussing at IETF is the use case
document, but not the profile or the event types.



>
> Phil
>
> On Sep 12, 2017, at 5:26 PM, Marius Scurtescu <mscurtescu at google.com>
> wrote:
>
> I think the RISC profile should be published as an OpenID standard, and
> not under IETF.
>
> I was planning to create a separate document for the event types. The
> reasoning was that event types will change more frequent and a separate
> document makes more sense. Let me know who would like to be an author and I
> will create the skeleton again in a couple of days.
>
> Marius
>
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Richard Backman, Annabelle <
> richanna at amazon.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Marius!
>>
>>
>>
>> Two questions:
>>
>>    1. Is the intention to publish RISC as RFCs through IETF? Or is it
>>    just a convenient organizing structure for now?
>>    2. Will the RISC event types be defined in this document, or in a
>>    separate document? I recall us talking about this in one of our F2Fs but I
>>    cannot remember the outcome. I do recall arguing that events defined in the
>>    future should be defined in separate documents.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Annabelle Richard Backman
>>
>> Identity Services
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Marius Scurtescu <mscurtescu at google.com>
>> *Date: *Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 9:18 PM
>> *To: *"openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net" <openid-specs-risc at lists.openi
>> d.net>
>> *Cc: *Phillip Hunt <phil.hunt at oracle.com>, "Richard Backman, Annabelle" <
>> richanna at amazon.com>, "secevemt at ve7jtb.com" <secevemt at ve7jtb.com>
>> *Subject: *RISC Profile
>>
>>
>>
>> The initial skeleton at:
>>
>> https://bitbucket.org/openid/risc
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bitbucket.org_openid_risc&d=DwMFaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PQcxBKCX5YTpkKY057SbK10&r=JBm5biRrKugCH0FkITSeGJxPEivzjWwlNKe4C_lLIGk&m=fGVjqygzih2rKAgh_tG96wuTq4FTaObaVe4DMSRcV7k&s=2dWBwy-kCe-JQKTc53o3n76H7RYTu1YQk0YJ0whUKR8&e=>
>>
>>
>> Marius
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-risc/attachments/20170913/5da885c5/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Openid-specs-risc mailing list