[Openid-specs-risc] [Cancelled] RISC Weekly 2/21

Marius Scurtescu mscurtescu at google.com
Mon Feb 26 19:04:33 UTC 2018

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Phil Hunt via Openid-specs-risc <
openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net> wrote:

> Hi,
> Unfortunately I have a conflict I cannot quite get out of this afternoon.
> My apologies for not being able to make it.
> I have posted a number of issues for discussion.  Note: these issues are
> more foundational principles that we should have consensus on before
> proceeding.
> Issue Tracker: https://bitbucket.org/openid/risc/issues?status=new&status=
> open
> My feeling is that any RISC Profile should only deal in issues or
> opportunities unique to RISC. It has not been clear what those RISC
> specific scoping issue are. Hence, I do not see the purpose for the current
> RISC Profile draft. For my part, I was expecting a draft that actually
> defined RISC Events.

A reminder that the draft that defines RISC events is in the same bitbucket
repo, it is called risc-event-types.xml:

See the original thread for PDF and ePub:

The event definitions were split out to allow the profiling of secevent
specs to take longer and to be able to stabilize the event types
independently. Without splitting, if the profile spec is being updated
(date and number incremented) and the event types are not affected then the
definition of what events are implemented by a given transmitter or
receiver becomes ambiguous.

> Dick commented on Feb 5 that:
> http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-risc/
> Week-of-Mon-20180205/000439.html
> I think “need” is too strong. A single management API is desired.
> Another aspect is that the management requirements of RISC, SCIM, OIDC etc. so far look quite different.
> RISC has specific needs, and with a concrete API, there can more easily be a discussion on commonalities, or lack thereof with other SecEvent profiles.
> These statements don’t really play out. The RISC group has not really
> identified why RISC is unique.
> I notice some are assuming OIDC which makes it unique.

The current base assumption is OAuth 2. One of the subject types makes
reference to OIDC.

Also, keep in mind that the base use cases are based on OAuth 2:

Yet, RISC was chartered as multi-protocol (including SAML and implicit
> federation).  In my view, RISC has a similar diversity as SECEVENTs itself
> given the requirements to support implicit federation and multiple profiles.
> Is it the intent to specifically narrow the scope in the RISC charter?
> Best Regards,
> Phil
> Oracle Corporation, Identity Cloud Services Architect
> @independentid
> www.independentid.com
> phil.hunt at oracle.com
> On Feb 21, 2018, at 2:29 PM, Luke Camery via Openid-specs-risc <
> openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net> wrote:
> Hey All,
> We are cancelling the meeting today due to our difficulty in getting the
> issue tracker setup. The issue tracker is now live
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bitbucket.org_openid_risc_issues-3Fstatus-3Dnew-26status-3Dopen&d=DwMFaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=na5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA&m=xlzDRBpfeMNMAeHgEZOVY7x9Q_UQSBC9LFpdcjQ1a_0&s=9RkYS_6vwFlnAK4ufG419GfShyfHdpqZWgRvvE-42qc&e=> on
> the RISC WG repo
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bitbucket.org_openid_risc_issues-3Fstatus-3Dnew-26status-3Dopen&d=DwMFaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=na5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA&m=xlzDRBpfeMNMAeHgEZOVY7x9Q_UQSBC9LFpdcjQ1a_0&s=9RkYS_6vwFlnAK4ufG419GfShyfHdpqZWgRvvE-42qc&e=>.
> Please post any issues that you would like to discuss on Monday at 15:00
> PST.
> The agenda for Monday will be to discuss issues posted to the tracker so
> please provide everyone with ample time to review your issue by posting as
> early as possible.
> Thanks,
> Luke
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 8:59 AM Luke Camery <lcamery at google.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Here
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1mM7IuVlAJS6bTnqgDMSD7ESpnsNRMME6I79-5FmE4K5Ns_edit-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwMFaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=na5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA&m=xlzDRBpfeMNMAeHgEZOVY7x9Q_UQSBC9LFpdcjQ1a_0&s=bTfeAlMUxp3o1kDhi84wQWP6YKo-aitQag0k4fOn7uo&e=>
>> are the notes from yesterday's weekly meeting. The working group moved to
>> postpone this next meeting to next Wednesday due to the American holiday on
>> Monday. The proposed time is 16:30 PST. Please respond if that time poses a
>> conflict for you and we can reschedule.
>> Thanks,
>> Luke
>> --
>> *  •  **Luke Camery*
>> *  •  *Associate Product Manager
>> *  •  *Federated Identity
> --
> *  •  **Luke Camery*
> *  •  *Associate Product Manager
> *  •  *Federated Identity
> _______________________________________________
> Openid-specs-risc mailing list
> Openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.
> openid.net_mailman_listinfo_openid-2Dspecs-2Drisc&d=DwICAg&c=
> RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=
> na5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA&m=xlzDRBpfeMNMAeHgEZOVY7x9Q_
> UQSBC9LFpdcjQ1a_0&s=qFLhSS8O5usMmqzbAk9MP05srYN4sCDktAMIJHUlmcs&e=
> _______________________________________________
> Openid-specs-risc mailing list
> Openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-risc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-risc/attachments/20180226/714c6172/attachment.html>

More information about the Openid-specs-risc mailing list