[Openid-specs-ab] OP Commands - alternative approaches for tenancy and bulk transfer

[Brian Campbell]

Once again, the alternative I'm suggesting, which is absolutely a
legitimate alternative even if you don't like it, is removal of treatment
of tenancy and bulk transfer.

On Wed, Mar 12, 2025, 1:21 PM Dick Hardt <dick.hardt at gmail.com> wrote:

> Once again, per the subject line, we would welcome an alternative proposal
> Brian.
>
> Stating it is not appropriate is an opinion, not a solution.
>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 6:20 PM Brian Campbell <bcampbell at pingidentity.com>
> wrote:
>
>> No one is pretending that multi-tenant OPs don't exist. It's that trying
>> to address one narrow aspect of tenancy in an ancillary document is
>> inappropriate.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 9:59 AM Dick Hardt <dick.hardt at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If you have an alternative approach to enabling multi-tenant OPs to
>>> signal which tenant they are acting on behalf of, I would be interested in
>>> hearing it.
>>>
>>> Pretending that multi-tenant OPs don't exist or should not exist is not
>>> an option.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 3:52 PM Brian Campbell <
>>> bcampbell at pingidentity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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.*
>>>
>>>
>> *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.*
>
>

-- 
_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/20250312/833d83b2/attachment-0001.htm>