[Openid-specs-ab] Roland Hedberg's federation specification
mike at gluu.org
Tue Jul 12 19:22:05 UTC 2016
I agree with your assessment. My comment was that perhaps this work
needs to be a more targeted working group at the OIDF, where we can get
the necessary collaboration of people who are specifically interested in
multi-party federation, but not maybe to all the other stuff that is
discussed in the main Connect working group.
On 2016-07-12 13:44, Nick Roy wrote:
> There's also the REFEDS oidcre list, where Roland has solicited some
> good feedback from the multilateral R&E federation community. I don't
> think having the OIDF adopt this and work on it is incompatible with
> discussion in the context of multilateral federations. I'd be happy
> to encourage folks from the R&E space to, for example, join this list
> if it would help. Agreeing to the IPR is difficult for some people
> representing higher ed institutions, but I know a couple of us have
> signed up as 'independent' successfully.
> Let me know if there are things I can do to help facilitate this
> interaction. I think Roland's work is very important, and I want to
> make sure it succeeds and that it can support the needs of
> multilateral federations.
> On 7/11/16, 5:05 PM, "Openid-specs-ab on behalf of Mike Schwartz"
> <openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net on behalf of mike at gluu.org>
> OpenID WG,
> I was reading the meeting notes today, and I want to interject my
> comments about Roland's OpenID Connect federation proposal.
> First of all, my assessment of Roland's draft is that it has
> gaps, and it needs a lot of work.
> I'm concerned that the imperatives of the main OpenID Connect group are
> consumer and enterprise authentication. Because this multi-party
> federration draft needs so much work, I think it would be better to
> develop it seperately, and bring it back to the main group when there
> consensus on a solution.
> There are a lot of interested parties with regard to the development of
> multi-party federation trust models who could contribute more
> effectively if the standard was developed under a more targeted working
> group. For example, as the co-chair of the Kantara OTTO WG, which was
> formed expressly to address the challenge of federation of Oauth2
> entities, I know we have a core group of people who are interested to
> It would be nice if whatever process takes place at OIDF should be an
> open, democratic forum, as several of us from OTTO would like to
> - Mike
> Michael Schwartz
> Founder / CEO
> mike at gluu.org
> Openid-specs-ab mailing list
> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
More information about the Openid-specs-ab