[OpenID] Interop (was: RE: Conformance and Interop...)

[Guido Sohne]

Can do. You will need to tell me what to do since I haven't done much
interop work yet.

-- G.

On 6/5/07, Granqvist, Hans <hgranqvist at verisign.com> wrote:
> Guido,
>
> OpenID 2.0 specifies compatibility with 1.x so any interop
> agenda would have to cover both. Want to work with me on
> the 1.x scenarios?
>
> -Hans
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Guido Sohne [mailto:guido at sohne.net]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 7:49 AM
> > To: Granqvist, Hans
> > Cc: Dick Hardt; David Fuelling; general at openid.net
> > Subject: Re: [OpenID] Interop (was: RE: Conformance and Interop...)
> >
> > Is your interop agenda only for OpenID 2.0, or is it also
> > going to include OpenID 1.x implementations?
> >
> > I'd rather not implement 2.0, it appears overwrought (design
> > by committee/special interest group). Here's a toast towards
> > OpenID 1.x continuing to evolve!
> >
> > -- G.
> >
> > On 6/4/07, Granqvist, Hans <hgranqvist at verisign.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Excellent.
> > >
> > > We need some deadlines as per below.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  ________________________________
> > >  From: Dick Hardt [mailto:dick at sxip.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 8:51 AM
> > > To: David Fuelling; Granqvist, Hans
> > > Cc: general at openid.net General
> > > Subject: Re: [OpenID] Interop (was: RE: Conformance and Interop...)
> > >
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > >
> > > Hans: let me know what we can do to support you coordinating!
> > >
> > >
> > > -- Dick
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 21-May-07, at 8:51 AM, David Fuelling wrote:
> > >
> > > +1.  I think Interop is a great idea, and I'd be fine if you led
> > > +things in
> > > this area.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 5/18/07, Granqvist, Hans < hgranqvist at verisign.com> wrote:
> > > > I've previously lead interops and I'll be willing to do
> > the same for
> > > > OpenID 2.0 provided:
> > > >
> > > > * This group votes in majority that interop is needed
> > > >
> > > > * This group sets up a schedule with deadlines:
> > > >   ** when to freeze 2.0 spec for interop testing,
> > > >   ** when interop scenarios need to be finalized,
> > > >   ** when interop testing needs to be concluded for 2.0
> > announcement
> > > >
> > > >   (I think the spec should be frozen < 1 month, with
> > > >   scenarios < 2 months, and final spec < 3 months)
> > > >
> > > > * There is a place off *.openid.net to keep the documents and
> > > >   perhaps even running an "interop.openid.net" service a la
> > > >   openidenabled.
> > > >
> > > > * I am joined by at least one more who is passionate about
> > > >   interop and with solid OpenID knowledge (probably most readers
> > > >   here) ;)
> > > >
> > > > What you say group?  I think the WSS interop (see
> > attached document,
> > > > unfortunately I could only find a draft at the moment) is
> > a bit more
> > > > complex than what we need for OpenID, but it's a good
> > example on the
> > > > level of what I think is needed.
> > > >
> > > > -Hans
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: general-bounces at openid.net
> > > > > [mailto:general-bounces at openid.net ] On Behalf Of
> > Recordon, David
> > > > > Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 11:45 AM
> > > > > To: Christopher St John; openid-general
> > > > > Subject: Re: [OpenID] Conformance and Interop,was:Re: JanRain
> > > > > library licensing (was: Re: On OpenID 2.0)
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd love to figure out how to get some good interop
> > testing going.
> > > > > Maybe figuring out some event we can get a majority of
> > > > > implementers face to face would be a good way to go.
> > > > >
> > > > > --David
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: general-bounces at openid.net
> > > > > [mailto:general-bounces at openid.net ] On Behalf Of
> > Christopher St
> > > > > John
> > > > > Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 1:33 PM
> > > > > To: openid-general
> > > > > Subject: [OpenID] Conformance and Interop,was:Re:
> > JanRain library
> > > > > licensing (was: Re: On OpenID 2.0)
> > > > >
> > > > > > Personally I think it is "good" for there to be several
> > > > > > implementations *if* the developers work together to
> > make sure
> > > > > > that the implementations interoperate.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What's up on the conformance and interop test fronts?
> > > > > Browsing around the wiki and spec list archives (via google)
> > > > > didn't turn up much other than an interop endpoint at
> > > > > openidenabled.com. But I could have easily missed something,
> > > > > pointers appreciated.
> > > > >
> > > > > -cks
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Christopher St. John
> > > > > http://artofsystems.blogspot.com
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > general mailing list
> > > > > general at openid.net
> > > > > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > general mailing list
> > > > > general at openid.net
> > > > > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > general mailing list
> > > > general at openid.net
> > > > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > general mailing list
> > > general at openid.net
> > > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > general mailing list
> > > general at openid.net
> > > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
> > >
> > >
> >
>