I agree with this. There are ways to lock in your ID if you wish (domain name, i-name, AOL offering, <a href="http://myopenid.com">myopenid.com</a>) -- if you do not wish, or do not care, that's your problem, not the protocol's :)
<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/9/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Evan Prodromou</b> <<a href="mailto:evan@prodromou.name">evan@prodromou.name</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Sat, 2007-12-05 at 23:17 +0200, Dmitry Shechtman wrote:<br><br>> 1. OpenID needs canonical IDs (duh!).<br><br>I strongly disagree with this.<br><br>I think OpenID works great as a loose confederation of identity<br>
providers which have their own rules for allocating or re-allocating<br>identifiers.<br><br>If relying parties require some high level of authentication, we have<br>ways to specify that.<br><br>If anyone wants a canonical ID, they should use the i-names system,
<br>already supported by OpenID.<br><br>I think this whole recycling-IDs issue is wrongheaded and broken.<br><br>Hands off my IdP!<br><br>-Evan<br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>general mailing list
<br><a href="mailto:general@openid.net">general@openid.net</a><br><a href="http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general">http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general</a><br><br><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>--
<br>- Stephen Paul Weber, Amateur Writer<br><<a href="http://www.awriterz.org">http://www.awriterz.org</a>><br><br>MSN/GTalk/Jabber: <a href="mailto:singpolyma@gmail.com">singpolyma@gmail.com</a><br>ICQ/AIM: 103332966
<br>BLOG: <a href="http://singpolyma.net/">http://singpolyma.net/</a>