[Openid-specs-ab] OP Commands - alternative approaches for tenancy and bulk transfer
Brian Campbell
bcampbell at pingidentity.com
Wed Mar 12 15:52:05 UTC 2025
The suggestion has been that tenancy need not and should not be modeled at
all in OP Commands.
On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 4:10 AM Dick Hardt <dick.hardt at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey
>
> Karl and I are looking forward to rolling up our sleeves and working on OP
> Commands.
>
> While we have modelled OP tenants as a claim with a tenant identifier or
> type of tenant, we know there may be a better model. If someone has an idea
> for a potentially better model, you don't need to write up a draft -- you
> can just write up a clear explanation that we can all review and discuss.
>
> I plan on writing up the other options we looked at for sending a large
> response so that we can have a discussion on that topic. I also plan on
> writing a PoC using SSE and will share that here.
>
> /Dick & Karl
>
--
_CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and privileged
material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review, use,
distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately
by e-mail and delete the message and any file attachments from your
computer. Thank you._
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20250312/9aa0e005/attachment.htm>
More information about the Openid-specs-ab
mailing list