[Openid-specs-ab] Spec Call Notes 8-Feb-21
Mike Jones
Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
Tue Feb 9 00:09:31 UTC 2021
Spec Call Notes 8-Feb-21
Mike Jones
John Bradley
Vittorio Bertocci
Brian Campbell
Kristina Yasuda
Tim Cappalli
Bjorn Hjelm
Tom Jones
Edmund Jay
Nat Sakimura
Federation Spec
Roland Hedberg is addressing comments by Brian and Torsten
There should be a new draft within a few weeks
This is based on three rounds of interop work last year
SCIM Update
Tim reported that Pam is trying to envision SCIM, FastFed, and SSE all working together
There may be a SCIM BoF at the next IETF
FastFed is now meeting every two weeks
FAPI V1 Final Specs
Edmund reported that issues are being filed, reviewed, and addressed
Browser Interactions Special Topic Call
Tim said that Microsoft plans to contribute its use cases, as do others
Vittorio expects he and George to contribute some scenarios
There will be another special topic call on Wednesday
SIOP Special Topic Call
The topic of the last call was portable identifiers
The goal is to enable all OPs to serve portable identifiers
John said that some people don't want to port the identifiers themselves - just the cryptographic keys behind them
The business model question was asked, on Mike's behalf
Some people didn't want to also have the business model discussion
They discussed some of the new functionality that would be needed by RPs and OPs to support portable identifiers
They discussed the relationship between this and the MODRNA account porting spec
Kristina observed that the topic is broader than self-issued identities, and therefore should be happening in the main Connect WG calls
Several others agreed with that
Tom asked about SIOP running over DIDComm
John said that he wasn't aware of alternate transport discussions
Mike's observations from listening to the recording
Interesting that people agreed that there is no real interest by normal humans
There may be de facto interest if the provider is going out of business
RP support appears to be needed for porting identities
There's a portable identifiers document being worked on
The topic appears to broad enough that it deserves its own spec, separate from the SIOP V2 spec
John reported that people didn't want the old provider to have to have a reference to the new provider
John stated that we should rely on cryptographic solutions - not centralized solutions, such as Docker images
He said that we might be able to have cryptographic proof of an old provider delegating to a new one
Nat commented that we could look at using an XRI-like model
Open Issues
https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues
#1206: How to support LD-Proofs in Verifiable Presentations
We should bring this up on a call when there are experts on the call
#1207: Custom URL scheme clarification needed
This may be a duplicate of #1199
Tim said that we shouldn't just give up on this - possibly discussing it with OS vendors
There was a discussion about the usability problems of multiple handlers on iOS vs. Android
#1203: sub_jwk when sub is DID in SIOP
Mike said that this is there to know which key to use
Wallet Discovery and Invocation
We agreed to have a wallet discovery and invocation discussion during a future SIOP special topic call
Tim said that this is also related to WebID
He asked why would WebID and this not be using CredMan?
Next Call
The next call is on Thursday, February 11th, 2021 at 7am Pacific Time
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20210209/84720b57/attachment.html>
More information about the Openid-specs-ab
mailing list