[OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group

Chuck Mortimore cmortimore at salesforce.com
Wed Jul 24 22:31:21 UTC 2013


Opening discussion again to help push this to completion.

I'm still not comfortable with "single authorization" as I believe it's
antithetical to what we actually need to build.      I do believe SSO best
describes the use-cases, but I'm willing to drop it to achieve agreement.

How about we drop all the qualifiers and simply call it the: *Native
Application Working Group* - it's high level and independent of
implementation, other than we're working on concerns for native apps.   We
can start with the current scope and it's easily re-charterable down the
road.

-cmort





On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Lewis Adam-CAL022 <
Adam.Lewis at motorolasolutions.com> wrote:

>  +2****
>
> ** **
>
> We have written our own such function as we indeed call it an “SSO
> client.”  It’s what developers understand.  It’s what user’s understand.
> It’s what RFIs and RFPs call for.  At the end of the day a name is just a
> name, but I personally find the name “native single authorization agent” to
> be a bit confusing.  ****
>
> ** **
>
> Let’s think about how this is intended to be used.  An mobile user
> downloads a Twitter client, a Facebook client, a G+ client and some other
> clients.  He signs on once and gets access to their information on
> Twitter/Facebook/G+/other.  Developers will think of it the same way.  It’s
> SSO across native apps.  Imagine if the SAML WebSSO profile was named the
> SAML single authorization agent profile?? J****
>
> ** **
>
> adam****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:
> openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net] *On Behalf Of *Richard Sand
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 18, 2013 12:00 PM
> *To:* Ashish Jain
> *Cc:* specs at openid.net; specs-council at openid.net
> *Subject:* Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group****
>
> ** **
>
> +1. The name will impact potential adoption, foolish to think it won't,
> and "SSO" is a commonly (mis)understood term and often appears in business
> requirements, even though it is often a misnomer or neglects other
> important related aspects such as log off, session management etc. SSO is a
> name here, not a binding technical scope
>
> Sent from my iPhone****
>
>
> On Jul 18, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Ashish Jain <email at ashishjain.com> wrote:***
> *
>
>  I still don't understand / agree with the objection on openid-specs-native-sso.
> That's the intent and the primary use case. It will be far more appealing /
> understandable to the mobile app developers than 'single authorization
> agent'. ****
>
> -- Ashish****
>
> ** **
>
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Paul Madsen <paulmadsen at rogers.com>
> wrote:****
>
> oh and I guess I should have mentioned the plans for a PRISMA subgroup
> ......****
>
> On 7/17/13 7:51 PM, John Bradley wrote:****
>
> Ok you have a point. NSAA then. ****
>
> ** **
>
> I want it in red. ****
>
> ** **
>
> Sent from my iPhone****
>
> ** **
>
> On 2013-07-17, at 7:28 PM, =JeffH <Jeff.Hodges at KingsMountain.com> <Jeff.Hodges at KingsMountain.com> wrote:****
>
> ** **
>
>  request that the name be changed to "Native Single Authorization Agent", with****
>
> the mailing list name openid-specs-nssa****
>
>  but "Native Single Authorization Agent" yields "nsaa" rather than "nssa", yes?****
>
> ** **
>
> thus "openid-specs-nsaa" ?****
>
> ** **
>
> =JeffH****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________****
>
> 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****
>
> ** **
>
>  _______________________________________________
> 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/20130724/347fc33a/attachment.html>


More information about the specs mailing list