[OpenID] Affliating OpenID sign ups

[Chris Drake]

Hi,

Does anyone remember SPF?  It was a brilliant standard to block email
forgery.  Microsoft started out trying to compete (Caller-ID for
Email) but since the open SPF standard had more momentum, MS jumped on
board (with a re-name to SenderID) - after taking out a stack of
patents to confuse the issue.  Next, Yahoo thought they could do
better so they ripped off the idea (DomainKeys), which of course
didn't do better, so they modified it (and renamed to DKIM).
Finally - pretty much everyone lost the plot (the plot was to prevent
email forgery, and everyone lost it when they lost the ability to
understand the difference between spam and forgery.  Everyone knew
spammers would simply start signing spam, so none of it was ever about
anti-spam work - but hey).  All the standards now have retrofitted
dodgey new anti-spam ideas, so we now have SPFv2 which isn't
compatible with SPF, isn't distinguishable from SPFv1, and forces all
the original SPF authors to upgrade to v2, or suffer
false-positive-nightmares.  And we have DKIM which simply destroys the
entire markets of email middleware, forwarding, maillinglists, and so
on, all while hiking up false-positive problems for everyone.

I'm sure there's a lesson to be learned here.  There seem to be a lot
of forces pulling at OpenID nowdays, just like SPF had.

Kind Regards,
Chris Drake,
=1id.com


Friday, March 14, 2008, 10:41:43 AM, you wrote:

DR> +1. Well said, Bill. I would go so far asto say some of the
DR> corporations now involved are here BECAUSE it is acommunity-led
DR> effort. The only way that would ever change is if the
DR> communitystops leading.

DR>  

DR> Given the set of voices we have here
Idon’t see that happening any time soon ;-)

DR>  

DR> =Drummond  

DR>  




DR> From:general-bounces at openid.net
DR> [mailto:general-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf Of Bill Washburn
DR> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 20085:08 PM
DR> To: Peter Williams
DR> Cc: general at openid.net
DR> Subject: Re: [OpenID] AffliatingOpenID sign ups


DR>  

DR> Hey...Peter,

DR> Dare to make a positive difference!  Why don't you fight the
DR> good fightand help the OpenID *community* flourish by doing a good
DR> thing: joining,voting, helping make the mettle of governance in
DR> the community a littlestronger with your strident opinions?  Or as
DR> the old saying goes, Ratherthan shout at the darkness, light a
DR> candle.

DR> As I see it, there are no immutable laws of the universe,
DR> natural or otherwise,written in stone somewhere that compel the
DR> inevitability of your logic thatcorporate interests must win and 
DR> community interests must suffer. OIDF is fully an intentional
DR> design by the OpenID Foundation Board to sustainand help the
DR> OpenID community.  Help us keep the founding charter as itcame
DR> from Brad et al. to serve everyone freely as envisioned. 
DR> Indeed,this intentional community is known well to the entire
DR> Board. Nothing elsewould do.

DR> cheers,
DR> -bill

DR> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Peter Williams
DR> <pwilliams at rapattoni.com>wrote:

DR> Affiliation protocols for OPs and the clickpass' idea (sp-centric trust
DR> model enforcement) are both topics that could be standardized to make an
DR> open market - addressing RPs.

DR> But, the point of being a(ny) board member is to ensure that only
DR> "certain" standards activities are actually authorized/endorsed bythe
DR> "Board" : the ones that benefit your investments. Then you"present" the
DR> rationale as "community interest", and "common good", etcetc - as to
DR> why certain things are not engaged in.

DR> If like ICANN/DNS you had community board members per grassroot
DR> involvement, who get all "user-interest focused" vs
DR> "corporate/money/defense focused" you change the governance rules so
DR> there simply are no more community board seats :-). Only govt/corporate
DR> types are allowed in the club.

DR> Be fun to see how long the "nobody owns this" philosophy lasts, nowbig
DR> money is in the air. I give it 6 months, till folks are fighting in the
DR> backroom over stuff. Nobody owns it will suddenly turn into ... well
DR> what we meant on referred "the core protocol". Of course!"service
DR> innovations" are allowed (that the Board will not allow to be
DR> standardized) that only some parties will own!

DR> Governance is hard. The early adoptors have to have some early lead - to
DR> payoff the bets and investments. But, standards means they don't get
DR> much of a head start, over the mere "followers". Governance issupposed
DR> to allow politics to manage those contrary goals. Governance always
DR> tests the mettle of a community.

DR> Peter.



>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: general-bounces at openid.net[mailto:general-bounces at openid.net]
DR> On
>> Behalf Of Chris Obdam
>> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:26 AM
>> To: general at openid.net
>> Subject: [OpenID] Affliating OpenID sign ups
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> myOpenID facilitates OpenID consumers a sign p service. It's called
>> affliliating. Are there plans integrating this kind of functionality
>> in to OpenID?
>>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> Chris Obdam
>> OpenID Netherlands
>> _______________________________________________
>> general mailing list
>> general at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
DR> _______________________________________________
DR> general mailing list
DR> general at openid.net
DR> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general




DR>