[OpenID] Recycling OpenIDs (Was: What's broken in OpenID 2.0?(IIW session))

[Dick Hardt]

On 13-May-07, at 8:06 PM, Chasen, Les wrote:

>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: general-bounces at openid.net [mailto:general-bounces at openid.net]
> On
>> Behalf Of Dick Hardt
>> Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 10:22 PM
>> To: rajeev
>> Cc: general at openid.net
>> Subject: Re: [OpenID] Recycling OpenIDs (Was: What's broken in OpenID
>> 2.0?(IIW session))
>>
>>
>
> [Chasen, Les] SNIP .....
>
>>
>> XRI does have something to offer, but also has what I consider a
>> number of disadvantages:
>>
>> + I can click on a URL in a browser and it opens a web page. I can't
>> do that with an XRI today.
> [Chasen, Les] Not true.  XRIs are URIs.

URLs are URIs. Not all URIs are URLs.

> Yes you need to be able to
> resolve them and there are not many resovlers deployed yet.  You  
> can use
> the global proxy resolver at xri.net.  http://xri.net/=les is a
> perfectly clickable xri.  Local resolvers are beginning to pop up  
> using
> the openXRI code base.  Openid4java is a nice example.  There is  
> also a
> firefox plugin written by http://xri.net/=wil.

Your kidding me with this argument that XRIs are clickable right?

>
>>
>> + I-names introduce a brand new directory and infrastructure.
> [Chasen, Les] Yes that is true but some would say that a dedicated
> identity layer is worth it.

I guess we will see.

>
>>
>> + how you prove that *you* are the one that controls the i-number is
>> a critical point of failure
> [Chasen, Les] How so?  How do you prove you are the owner of a URL?

Your not answering my question.

>
>>
>> I am reluctant to point out the issues with XRIs. I am biased against
>> them and don't think they add much vale, *but* I am willing to let
>> the market decide and be proven wrong. Per my proposal, I think we
>> can provide similar value with URLs.
> [Chasen, Les] Reluctant to a point :)  Yes the market will decide.

Yep.