OpenID 2.0 finalization progress

[Gabe Wachob]

I've already suggested that to the OAuth community and they are heartily
taking up that suggestion... 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: specs-bounces at openid.net [mailto:specs-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf
> Of Pat Patterson
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 4:36 PM
> To: Johannes Ernst
> Cc: specs at openid.net
> Subject: Re: OpenID 2.0 finalization progress
> 
> +1 FWIW
> 
> Interested parties, feel free to use the Sun OpenID NAC as a model -
> http://www.sun.com/software/standards/persistent/openid/nac.xml
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Pat
> 
> On Oct 19, 2007, at 4:12 PM, Johannes Ernst wrote:
> 
> > Some years ago, if I recall correctly, Rambus participated in an open
> > industry process (or so the other participants thought) to define
> > certain memory communications protocols, and after they had produced
> > a spec, Rambus said "but we have some patents". This lead to at least
> > one lawsuit I believe.
> >
> > I have heard wildly diverging assessments on whether or not this
> > could happen here. The way to move forward is to put the IPR policy
> > in place prior to declaring any new specs final; fortunately we are
> > very close on the IPR policy.
> >
> > I strongly suggest that whoever feels the urgency to get a 2.0 spec
> > declared final to help out driving the IPR process to a close. That's
> > on the critical path, and that's where all energies should be
> > directed.
> >
> > On Oct 19, 2007, at 12:23, Kevin Turner wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 10:02 -0700, Paul C. Bryan wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 19:13 -0700, Dick Hardt wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I don't see why the two processes need to be any more dependant on
> >>>> each other then they are already.
> >>>
> >>> With all due respect, why take the risk that there are intellectual
> >>> property issues after the specification is finalized?
> >>
> >> I'll let my ignorance show here: How will any potential IPR issues
> >> affect the final specification?  I recognize that many parties
> >> require
> >> the IPR documentation before moving forward with their adoption of
> >> OpenID.  However, there are many parties who do _not_ feel that need,
> >> and I do not understand what the downside is to calling the
> >> specification final now.  Are we waiting on the results of a patent
> >> search which might necessitate re-working parts of the protocol?
> >> What
> >> exactly are the consequences, worst case, in calling the
> >> specification
> >> "final" before the IPR is sealed?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> specs mailing list
> >> specs at openid.net
> >> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > specs mailing list
> > specs at openid.net
> > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
> 
> - - - - -
> Pat Patterson
> Federation Architect, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> pat.patterson at sun.com - http://blogs.sun.com/superpat
> - - - - -
> Join OpenSSO today! http://opensso.dev.java.net/
> - - - - -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> specs mailing list
> specs at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs