[OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group

Wed Jul 17 21:18:44 UTC 2013

Actually we have bike sheded on names in the past.  Though I don't think people were that concerned about Artifact Binding becoming a marketing name at the time. 

If accepting Mike's name proposal gets us through the specs council, then I am ok with it. 

Yes Nat's calculation was off due to the resubmission. 

Sent from my iPhone

On 2013-07-17, at 4:51 PM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com> wrote:

> I don’t believe the acronym NSSA – for Native Single Authorization Agent is taken in computer science contexts (the National Scholastic Surfing Association notwithstanding).
>  
> I agree with John that the “single” is important and agree with Tony that “single” doesn’t qualify “sign-on” in this case.
>  
> Can we go with the name Native Single Authorization Agent and the mailing list name openid-specs-nssa and call it good?
>  
>                                                             -- Mike
>  
> From: Broberg, Jeffrey C [mailto:Jeffrey.Broberg at ca.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 12:27 PM
> To: Mike Jones; John Bradley
> Cc: specs at openid.net; John Ehrig; Don Thibeau
> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group
>  
> Tony,
>  
> SAA -> IBM Systems Application Architecture which is from the prehistoric days
>  
> jeff
>  
> From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>
> Date: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 3:22 PM
> To: John Bradley <jbradley at pingidentity.com>
> Cc: "specs at openid.net" <specs at openid.net>, John Ehrig <jehrig at inventures.com>, Don Thibeau <don at oidf.org>
> Subject: RE: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group
>  
> That would work for me.  I do believe (as specs council member) that getting a name for the working group that people believe is accurate and reflective of what the work is intended to accomplish is important.
>  
>                                                             -- Mike
>  
> From: John Bradley [mailto:jbradley at pingidentity.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 12:20 PM
> To: Mike Jones
> Cc: Anthony Nadalin; Paul Madsen; Don Thibeau; specs at openid.net; John Ehrig
> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group
>  
> In as much as people believe they are signing on to native applications I think that openid-specs-native-sso is a fine name.
>  
> On the other hand technically we are using a single authentication/authorization event to authorize an agent to authorize further apps.
>  
> So we could invent a new acronym  for Single Authorization Agent  (SAA) to get around the objection to signon.
>  
> openid-specs-native-saa
>  
> I think the single is important.
>  
> John B.
>  
> John Bradley  |  Sr. Technical Architect
> Ping Identity  |   www.pingidentity.com
>  
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> O: +1 720.306.6055   M: +1 (303) 396-9546
> Email: jbradley at pingidentity.com
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - -
> Join me at Cloud Identity Summit
> www.cloudidentitysummit.com 
> Twitter: @CloudIDSummit
> Facebook.com/CloudIdentitySummit
>    Connect with me
>    Twitter: @ve7jtb
>    LinkedIn.com/in/v7jtb
>  
>  
> On 2013-07-17, at 3:07 PM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> So you’d prefer that the work be called something closer to “Native Application Authorization”?
>  
> From: Anthony Nadalin 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:50 AM
> To: Paul Madsen; Don Thibeau
> Cc: Mike Jones; John Bradley; specs at openid.net; John Ehrig
> Subject: RE: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group
>  
> I would have been too young back in the 90s
>  
> I don’t like SSO in the name as this is basically this is just a way to authorize an app to interact with one or more resource serves on your behalf
>  
> From: Paul Madsen [mailto:paulmadsen at rogers.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:39 AM
> To: Don Thibeau
> Cc: Anthony Nadalin; Mike Jones; John Bradley; specs at openid.net; John Ehrig
> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group
>  
> I am 99% confident that *our* beloved Tony was not part of the R&B group from Oakland, briefly popular in the 90s.....
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony!_Toni!_Ton%C3%A9!
> 
> On 7/17/13 2:33 PM, Don Thibeau wrote:
> Paul
>  
> I don't think "Tony Tony Tony"  is a good name for a working group :)
>  
> Don Thibeau
> The OpenID Foundation
>  
>  
>  
> On Jul 17, 2013, at 2:30 PM, Paul Madsen wrote:
>  
> 
> Tony Tony Tony, how I've missed our time together
> 
> The WG's mandate is to profile OIDC to enable an SSO model for native mobile applications. 
> 
> Can you suggest a better (concise & memorable) descriptor for a mail list identifier?
> 
> paul
> 
> On 7/17/13 2:17 PM, Anthony Nadalin wrote:
> That’s a totally useless name
>  
> From: openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Paul Madsen
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 10:59 AM
> To: Mike Jones
> Cc: John Bradley; specs at openid.net; John Ehrig; Don Thibeau
> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group
>  
> that list name is fine
> 
> thanks
> 
> On 7/17/13 1:51 PM, Mike Jones wrote:
> John, are you able to create the new mailing list at lists.openid.net or do we have to asksupport at osuosl.org for the list creation?
>  
> Paul and other WG creators, what name do you want the list to have?  openid-specs-native-sso?
>  
>                                                             -- Mike
>  
> From: Don Thibeau [mailto:don at oidf.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 5:03 AM
> To: Paul Madsen
> Cc: n-sakimura; John Ehrig; openid-specs at lists.openid.net; John Bradley; Mike Jones
> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group
>  
> John Ehrig can set up the web site space and the online Docusign process for IPR collection.  If done right away it saves all concerned lots of time and hassle.
>  
>  
> Don Thibeau
> The OpenID Foundation
>  
>  
>  
> On Jul 17, 2013, at 7:59 AM, Paul Madsen wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Nat, 
> 
> Don, can you direct me to whomever I should work with on the WG list & page logistics?
> 
> Paul
> 
> On 7/16/13 6:08 AM, n-sakimura wrote:
> The WG formation is deemed to be approved per section 4.2 of the OpenID Process Document v.1.5 of 2009. 
> 
> A new mailing list should be established promptly per section 4.3 of the above document. Also, a WG web pages should be set up at openid.net. You should also ask the secretary of the foundation to announce the first meeting of the WG, in which scope approval and the chairs selection should be done. 
> 
> Note: the first meeting can only be done after the WG has collected the IPR agreement from the participants, so it may not be as quick as you may wish, but it has to be done. BTW, NRI's agreement is already in as we have a blanket agreement like Google. 
> 
> Nat 
> 
> (2013/07/15 14:56), Paul Madsen wrote: 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Next steps? 
> 
> ----------- 
> Paul Madsen 
> Ping Identity 
> 
> Anthony Nadalin<tonynad at microsoft.com>  wrote: 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe if you dig you will see that there is potential for IPR from both Apple and Facebook. 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of n-sakimura 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 10:20 PM 
> To: openid-specs at lists.openid.net 
> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group 
> 
> Could you kindly spell it out? 
> 
>  From what I have been hearing, Facebook was just using fast application switch, which is nothing more than Self-issued thing that we have, and iOS's native login support given to facebook, twitter, and Weibo. 
> Perhaps you are thinking of something else. 
> 
> Of course, I could be complete wrong. I should probably read 
>     https://developers.facebook.com/docs/howtos/ios-6/ 
> and 
> 
> http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/Social/Reference/Social_Framework/_index.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40012233 
> 
> as well. 
> 
> Having said that, if Apple's interface is not open, perhaps it is a task for an industry consortia like OpenID Foundation to go and ask Apple to open up the API for other IdPs as well. Do not know if they are going to listen, but still, it might be our duty to try. 
> 
> Nat 
> 
> (2013/07/04 7:30), Anthony Nadalin wrote: 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I also have a concern that we might be infringing on the Facebook SSO 
> (iOS) IPR with this effort.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Nat Sakimura (n-sakimura at nri.co.jp) 
> Nomura Research Institute, Ltd. 
> Tel:+81-3-6274-1412 Fax:+81-3-6274-1547 
> 
> PLEASE READ: 
> The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only. 
> If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. 
> _______________________________________________ 
> specs mailing list 
> specs at lists.openid.net 
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> specs mailing list 
> specs at lists.openid.net 
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
>  
> 
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> specs mailing list
> specs at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs/attachments/20130717/81d3930e/attachment.html>