[OIDFSC] FW: Proposal to create the TX working group
Tatsuki Sakushima
tatsuki at nri.com
Wed Jan 21 05:04:49 UTC 2009
Members of the Spec Council and the CX WG Proposers,
Since two members(David and Allen) from the Spec Council are available on 21st tomorrow,
I'd like to schedule a telcon on 3pm 1/21. (Some of us have an ORMS telecon from 2pm, I'll
make it start 5 mins passed 3pm.)
Here is the access information for the conference bridge tomorrow:
Date: Thursday, 15 January 2009 USA
Time: 3:05PM - 4:05AM(PST)
(This is PST. Please see the time at your time zone at Doodle.)
TO ACCESS THE AUDIO CONFERENCE:
Dial In Number: 1 (605) 475-4333
Access Code: 199834
For the proposers,
Even though you don't update your schedule yet, please feel free to join the meeting.
Best,
Tatsuki
Tatsuki Sakushima
NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
(1/20/09 2:14 PM), Tatsuki Sakushima wrote:
> Thank you, David.
>
> To the proposers,
>
> Please update your availability on 3pm of 21st as well.
>
> 1. Go to http://www.doodle.com/rat2s87iyeqxd79z
> 2. Click "Edit an entry"
> 3. Click a little icon right next to your name
> 4. Apply the change
>
> I'd like to close this poll by the 9pm on PST today and send the
> conference bridge information to participants.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Tatsuki Sakushima
> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
> TEL:(650)638-7258
> SkypeIn:(650)209-4811
>
> (1/20/09 12:59 PM), David Recordon wrote:
>> 3pm Pacific works for me on the 21st. I'll update my Doodle response.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> ---
>> Sent from my iPhone Classic.
>>
>> On Jan 20, 2009, at 9:59 AM, Tatsuki Sakushima <tatsuki at nri.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I temporarily add 3:00pm of 21st. When Mike or David suggest the time
>>> good for them,
>>> I'll update it.
>>>
>>> Tatsuki
>>>
>>> Tatsuki Sakushima
>>> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
>>>
>>> (1/19/09 5:30 PM), Nat Sakimura wrote:
>>>> What time woud be good then?
>>>>
>>>> =nat
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 5:45 AM, Mike Jones
>>>> <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I could do some other times that day but not that hour.
>>>>
>>>> -- Mike
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: specs-council-bounces at openid.net
>>>> <mailto:specs-council-bounces at openid.net>
>>>> [mailto:specs-council-bounces at openid.net
>>>> <mailto:specs-council-bounces at openid.net>] On Behalf Of Drummond
>>>> Reed
>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 8:43 PM
>>>> To: 'Nat Sakimura'; 'David Recordon'; 'Tatsuki Sakushima'
>>>> Cc: specs-council at openid.net <mailto:specs-council at openid.net>
>>>> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] FW: Proposal to create the TX working group
>>>>
>>>> Right now I could do the 21st at 15:00PST.
>>>>
>>>> =Drummond
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: specs-council-bounces at openid.net
>>>> <mailto:specs-council-bounces at openid.net> [mailto:specs-council-
>>>> <mailto:specs-council->
>>>>> bounces at openid.net <mailto:bounces at openid.net>] On Behalf Of Nat
>>>> Sakimura
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 6:45 PM
>>>>> To: David Recordon; Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>>> Cc: specs-council at openid.net <mailto:specs-council at openid.net>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] FW: Proposal to create the TX working group
>>>>>
>>>>> What about other people for 21st 15:00 PST?
>>>>>
>>>>> Tatsuki, could you add that date to the doodle poll as well?
>>>>>
>>>>> =nat
>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>> From: "David Recordon" <recordond at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com>>
>>>>> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 3:51 PM
>>>>> To: "Tatsuki Sakushima" <tatsuki at nri.com <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>
>>>>> Cc: <specs-council at openid.net <mailto:specs-council at openid.net>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] FW: Proposal to create the TX working group
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks, though neither of those times work for me unfortunately
>>>> but any
>>>>> time the 21st should.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>>> <tatsuki at nri.com <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As many of you suggested using Doodle.com, I created the event
>>>> there:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.doodle.com/rat2s87iyeqxd79z
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please update your schedule there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tatsuki
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>>>> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (1/15/09 5:04 PM), Tatsuki Sakushima wrote:
>>>>>> Dear the Specifications Council members (especially David and
>>>> Mike) and
>>>>>> the proposers of the CX WG,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Upon the request by David, I re-schedule this teleconference to
>>>> the next
>>>>> week.
>>>>>> Please reply this message and specify the option that you
>>>> prefer. Based
>>>>>> on replies from all participants who intend to join, I'll set up a
>>>>>> conference bridge and email them the information.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suggest the following schedules as candidate dates:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) 4:00pm on 1/22(PST)
>>>>>> 12:00am on 1/22(GMT)
>>>>>> 9:00am on 1/23(JST)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) 2:00pm on 1/23(PST)
>>>>>> 10:00pm on 1/23(GMT)
>>>>>> 7:00am on 1/24(JST)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the OIDFSC mailing list, David already stated and explained
>>>> concerns
>>>>>> about the previous charter submitted by Nat:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000045.html
>>>>>> http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000046.html
>>>>>> http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000027.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The group of the proposers(Nat, Drummond, John, Henrik and Tatsuki)
>>>>> gathered today to
>>>>>> discuss how to change the charter that does hopefully eliminate the
>>>>> concerns mentioned in
>>>>>> the messages from Mike and David. The updated version is on the
>>>> same
>>>>> wiki page:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please take another look at it before the teleconference and
>>>> provide us
>>>>> feedbacks
>>>>>> so that we can discuss about the new charter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you have any comments or concerns about scheduling and so forth,
>>>>> please let me know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Tatsuki
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>>>> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (1/15/09 2:50 PM), David Recordon wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Tatsuki,
>>>>>> I'm really sorry but it turns out that I must have mixed up my
>>>> days when
>>>>> looking at the times yesterday. I have a two hour meeting at 3pm
>>>> today.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it possible to try to plan this call more than a day in
>>>> advance for
>>>>> next week?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry,
>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>>> <tatsuki at nri.com <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>
>>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David and Mike Jones from the spec council responded for this
>>>>>> invitation.
>>>>>> David can join a conference call on the 1) slot, so I'd like
>>>> schedule
>>>>>> a call on the date below:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Date: Thursday, 15 January 2009 USA
>>>>>> Time: 3:05PM - 4:05AM(PST)
>>>>>> 11:05PM on 1/15(GMT)
>>>>>> 8:05PM on 1/16(JST)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TO ACCESS THE AUDIO CONFERENCE:
>>>>>> Dial In Number: 1 (605) 475-4333
>>>>>> Access Code: 199834
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From the proposers side, I confirmed that Nat, Drummond, John,
>>>>>> and I can join. Unfortunately Mike Graves and Henrik cannot join
>>>>>> because both of them are not available on the 1) slot but on
>>>> the 2).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Tatsuki
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>>>> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (1/14/09 1:59 PM), Tatsuki Sakushima wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I suggest the following schedules as candidate dates:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) 2:00pm on 1/15(PST)
>>>>>>> 10:00pm on 1/15(GMT)
>>>>>>> 7:00am on 1/16(JST)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thursday, there is a XRI TC telecon that many of us join.
>>>>>> Therefore, I suggested a hour moved back on 1). The new
>>>> schedule
>>>>>> is below:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) 3:00pm on 1/15(PST)
>>>>>> 11:00pm on 1/15(GMT)
>>>>>> 8:00am on 1/16(JST)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry for members in Europe. I might be hard to join it
>>>> at this
>>>>>> hour.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Tatsuki
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>>>> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
>>>>>> TEL:(650)638-7258
>>>>>> SkypeIn:(650)209-4811
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (1/14/09 1:45 PM), Tatsuki Sakushima wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (The options of the schedules have the same number. I
>>>> send the
>>>>>> collection and please discard the previous one.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear the Specifications Council members (especially David
>>>>>> and Mike) and
>>>>>> the proposers of the CX WG,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Upon the request of scheduling a call by Nat, I'd like to
>>>>>> invite all the
>>>>>> members of the spec council and the CX WG proposers to a
>>>>>> teleconference
>>>>>> to discuss how to solve the charter clarification and
>>>> scope
>>>>>> concerns
>>>>>> pointed out by the spec council.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suggest the following schedules as candidate dates:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) 2:00pm on 1/15(PST)
>>>>>> 10:00pm on 1/15(GMT)
>>>>>> 7:00am on 1/16(JST)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) 2:00pm on 1/16(PST)
>>>>>> 10:00pm on 1/16(GMT)
>>>>>> 7:00am on 1/17(JST)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please reply this message and specify the option that you
>>>>>> prefer. Based
>>>>>> on replies from all participants who intend to join, I'll
>>>>>> set up a
>>>>>> conference bridge and email them the information.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the OIDFSC mailing list, David already stated and
>>>>>> explained concerns
>>>>>> about the previous charter submitted by Nat:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-
>>>>> December/000045.html
>>>>>> http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-
>>>>> December/000046.html
>>>>>> http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-
>>>>> December/000027.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that the goal of this telecon is:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> a) For the proposers to clarify points of concerns
>>>> raised by
>>>>>> the council
>>>>>> and explain intentions of the WG.
>>>>>> b) For the spec council to provide concrete
>>>> suggestions to
>>>>>> make the
>>>>>> charter comfortable and reasonable to the spec
>>>> council and
>>>>>> the community .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you have any comments or concerns on this message,
>>>> please
>>>>>> let me know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Tatsuki
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>>>> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (1/13/09 12:15 AM), Nat Sakimura wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tatsuki,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could you kindly set-up a followup call, please?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the mean time though, I would like to ask spec
>>>>>> council members for the response towards the answers
>>>>>> given by the proposers to your concerns. Any concrete
>>>>>> suggestion to make it acceptable to the spec
>>>> council is
>>>>>> also welcome. It's a wiki, after all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As to the "community support", it would probably
>>>> depend
>>>>>> on what "community".
>>>>>> The proposers are probably talking of higher value
>>>>>> transaction users, and if we do it in timely
>>>> manner, I
>>>>>> am pretty confident that it will have some
>>>> traction, but
>>>>>> it needs to happen fast. If we take too much
>>>> time, the
>>>>>> opportunity will go away from OpenID.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> =nat
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2009/1/1 Drummond Reed
>>>>> <Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>>>>
>>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net><mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>>>>
>>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net><mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>>>>
>>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net><mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>>>>
>>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net><mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> First, I agree with Henrik's comments (see his
>>>>>> separate email).
>>>>>> Second, to say, "I do not believe that it
>>>> currently
>>>>>> has sufficient
>>>>>> support within the OpenID community to
>>>> succeed", did
>>>>>> you see the
>>>>>> list of proposers for this workgroup?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Drummond Reed,
>>>>> drummond.reed at parity.com
>>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com><mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com><mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com><mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com><mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com>>>>,
>>>>>> Cordance/Parity/OASIS (U.S.A)
>>>>>> * Henrik Biering,
>>>>> hb at netamia.com <mailto:hb at netamia.com><mailto:hb at netamia.com
>>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com
>>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com><mailto:hb at netamia.com
>>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com>>>
>>>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com
>>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com><mailto:hb at netamia.com
>>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com
>>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com><mailto:hb at netamia.com
>>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com>>>>,
>>>>>> Netamia (Denmark)
>>>>>> * Hideki Nara, hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic- <mailto:hdknr at ic->
>>>>> tact.co.jp <http://tact.co.jp>>
>>>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>>
>>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>
>>>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>>>,
>>>>>> Tact Communications (Japan)
>>>>>> * John Bradeley,
>>>>> jbradley at mac.com
>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com><mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com><mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com>>>
>>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com><mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com><mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com>>>>,
>>>>>> OASIS IDTrust Member Section (Canada)
>>>>>> * Mike Graves,
>>>>> mgraves at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com><mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com><mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com>>>
>>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com><mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com><mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com>>>>,
>>>>>> JanRain, Inc. (U.S.A.)
>>>>>> * Nat Sakimura, n-sakimura at nri.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp><mailto:n- <mailto:n->
>>>>> sakimura at nri.co.jp <mailto:sakimura at nri.co.jp>>
>>>>>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp><mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp>>>
>>>>>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp><mailto:n- <mailto:n->
>>>>> sakimura at nri.co.jp <mailto:sakimura at nri.co.jp>>
>>>>>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp><mailto:n- <mailto:n->
>>>>> sakimura at nri.co.jp <mailto:sakimura at nri.co.jp>>>>, Nomura
>>>> Research Institute,
>>>>>> Ltd.(Japan)
>>>>>> * Robert Ott,
>>>>> robert.ott at clavid.com
>>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com><mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com><mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com><mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com><mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com>>>>, Clavid
>>>>> (Switzerland)
>>>>>> * Tatsuki Sakushima,
>>>>> tatsuki at nri.com <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>>
>>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>>>,
>>>>>> NRI America, Inc. (U.S.A.)
>>>>>> * Toru Yamaguchi,
>>>>> trymch at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com><mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com><mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com>>>
>>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com><mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com><mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com>>>>,
>>>>>> Cybozu Labs (Japan)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In short, my first reaction to reading your
>>>> email was
>>>>>> to think,
>>>>>> "Wow, here it is, the first example of OpenID
>>>> turning
>>>>>> into W3C and
>>>>>> IETF and every other standards organization that
>>>>>> turns into a small
>>>>>> group of insiders trying to control innovation!"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course I think you, more than almost
>>>> anyone,
>>>>>> can appreciate the
>>>>>> irony of that thought - I believe it was to avoid
>>>>>> that very
>>>>>> situation that the OIDF was created, no?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So if we DON'T want that to happen, I
>>>> think what
>>>>>> we need to do ASAP
>>>>>> is turn this into a constructive dialog
>>>> between the
>>>>>> proposers of
>>>>>> this Working Group and the Specs Council about how
>>>>>> the charter might
>>>>>> be amended to addess some of your concerns.
>>>> (I'm not
>>>>>> commenting yet
>>>>>> on your specific concerns, other than to say
>>>> that I
>>>>>> agree with some
>>>>>> and not with others.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suspect email is going to be much too
>>>> slow for
>>>>>> such a dialog, so I
>>>>>> would suggest that Nat and Tatksuki set up a
>>>> telecon
>>>>>> between the
>>>>>> Working Group proposers and the Specs Council
>>>>>> members. I would also
>>>>>> suggest that before such a telecon, the Specs
>>>> Council
>>>>>> get together
>>>>>> and collectively list their issues with the
>>>> Charter
>>>>>> on the Working
>>>>>> Group Charter page. I have added a section for
>>>> this
>>>>>> purpose:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1#cSpecification
>>>>
>>>>> CouncilIssues
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It may be that all the Specs Council members
>>>>>> agree with your four
>>>>>> points below, in which case you can just wholesale
>>>>>> copy them into
>>>>>> the wiki page. However it is very important
>>>> that the
>>>>>> Specs Council
>>>>>> come to it's own consensus about the issues it has
>>>>>> with the charter,
>>>>>> because without that, the WG proposers have no
>>>> hope
>>>>>> of addressing
>>>>>> these issues, either with counterarguments or with
>>>>>> potential amendments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Listing the issues there also enables us
>>>> to have
>>>>>> a more focused
>>>>>> discussion than email alone by using comments
>>>>>> directly on the wiki page.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> =Drummond
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* David Recordon
>>>>> [mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com><mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com><mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com>>>
>>>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com><mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com><mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com>>>>]
>>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 31, 2008 12:33 AM
>>>>>> *To:* Nat Sakimura
>>>>>> *Cc:* specs-council at openid.net
>>>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net><mailto:specs- <mailto:specs->
>>>>> council at openid.net <mailto:council at openid.net>>
>>>>>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net
>>>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net><mailto:specs- <mailto:specs->
>>>>> council at openid.net <mailto:council at openid.net>>>
>>>>>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net
>>>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net><mailto:specs- <mailto:specs->
>>>>> council at openid.net <mailto:council at openid.net>>
>>>>>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net
>>>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net><mailto:specs- <mailto:specs->
>>>>> council at openid.net <mailto:council at openid.net>>>>;
>>>>>> Josh Hoyt; Tatsuki Sakushima; John Bradley;
>>>>>> hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>
>>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>>
>>>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>
>>>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>>>;
>>>>> Robert Ott; Michael
>>>>>> Graves; Henrik
>>>>>> Biering; Drummond Reed; Nat Sakimura; 山口徹
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [OIDFSC] FW: Proposal to create
>>>> the TX
>>>>>> working group
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Nat,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I read Josh's email as agreeing with Mike's
>>>> statement
>>>>> of:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The OpenID Specifications Council recommends that
>>>>>> members reject
>>>>>> this proposal to create a working group
>>>> because the
>>>>>> charter is
>>>>>> excessively broad, it seems to propose the
>>>> creation
>>>>>> of new
>>>>>> mechanisms that unnecessarily create new ways
>>>> to do
>>>>>> accomplish
>>>>>> existing tasks, such as digital signatures, and it
>>>>>> the proposal is
>>>>>> not sufficiently clear on whether it builds upon
>>>>>> existing mechanisms
>>>>>> such as AX 1.0 in a compatible manner, or
>>>> whether it
>>>>>> requires
>>>>>> breaking changes to these underlying protocols.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While you have clarified that you don't intend to
>>>>>> create a new XML
>>>>>> signature mechanism, OAuth describes a
>>>> mechanism to
>>>>>> use public keys
>>>>>> to sign these sorts of parameters. Signatures
>>>> aside,
>>>>>> as Mike said
>>>>>> other aspects of the charter seem quite broad
>>>> and it
>>>>>> is unclear how
>>>>>> it will build upon AX 1.0 and other underlying
>>>>>> existing OpenID
>>>>>> technologies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Given the draft charter at
>>>>>>
>>>>> http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1:
>>>>>> 1) The purpose of producing a series of extensions
>>>>>> seems too broad. OpenID was born on the idea of
>>>>>> doing one simple thing and we've seen
>>>>>> success with OpenID and related technologies when
>>>>>> they are made up
>>>>>> of small pieces loosely joined. OpenID
>>>>>> Authentication 2.0 broke
>>>>>> this rule in some areas and we're now seeing the
>>>>>> repercussions of
>>>>>> doing so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) In what jurisdictions are these contracts
>>>> legally
>>>>>> binding? Is
>>>>>> "arbitrary parties to create and exchange a
>>>>>> mutually-digitally-signed legally binding
>>>> 'contract'"
>>>>>> a justifiable
>>>>>> statement or should it be toned down? It
>>>> should also
>>>>>> be kept in
>>>>>> mind that since OpenID's creation it has been very
>>>>>> clear that OpenID
>>>>>> does not provide trust, but rather trust can
>>>> be built
>>>>>> on top of
>>>>>> identity. I'm not saying that OpenID should never
>>>>>> deal with trust,
>>>>>> just trying to understand if this Working Group
>>>>>> intends to change
>>>>>> how OpenID currently does not create this form of
>>>>> trust.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) The purpose says that the Working Group
>>>> intends to
>>>>>> possibly
>>>>>> extend AX and create a series of
>>>> specifications. It
>>>>>> does not seem
>>>>>> prudent to give a Working Group the ability to
>>>>>> arbitrarily extend an
>>>>>> existing extension or create an unlimited
>>>> number of
>>>>>> specifications.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4) The Scope section is still not clear as to what
>>>>>> the Working Group
>>>>>> will actually be producing. I would prefer to see
>>>>>> the section
>>>>>> rewritten, maybe mimicking the structure currently
>>>>>> being considered
>>>>>> for the specification.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As to if you wish to force this proposal
>>>> forward, I
>>>>>> do not believe
>>>>>> that it currently has sufficient support
>>>> within the
>>>>>> OpenID community
>>>>>> to succeed and that its broad scope
>>>> contravenes the
>>>>>> community's
>>>>>> purpose. This is why I'm really hoping that the
>>>>>> proposal can be
>>>>>> refined to something which will be successful
>>>> that a
>>>>>> broad community
>>>>>> can get behind!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 9:03 PM, Nat Sakimura
>>>>>> <sakimura at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com><mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com>>
>>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com><mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com>>>
>>>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com><mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com><mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Josh,
>>>>>> To which statement did you agree?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There has been a several things that has been
>>>>>> pointed out, but I
>>>>>> think I have answered to them.
>>>>>> For example, for XML Sig, I have stated
>>>> that this
>>>>>> spec is not for
>>>>>> XML, etc.
>>>>>> For modularization, yes, that is a possibility
>>>> but a
>>>>>> scope needs to
>>>>>> be able to cover a field that it requires,
>>>> even if it
>>>>>> ends up not
>>>>>> covering that field.
>>>>>> It is impossible to widen the scope though
>>>> narrowing
>>>>>> it down at a
>>>>>> later date is easy.
>>>>>> Unfortunately, I have not heard back any
>>>> concrete
>>>>>> response
>>>>>> for amendments. It would be more constructive
>>>> to have
>>>>>> those.
>>>>>> Also, if you are giving advise to the
>>>> membership
>>>>>> an recommendation
>>>>>> for not approving it, you need to state the
>>>> reasons
>>>>>> concretely.
>>>>>> It needs to be one of
>>>>>> (a) an incomplete Proposal (i.e.,
>>>> failure to
>>>>>> comply with §4.1);
>>>>>> (b) a determination that the proposal
>>>> contravenes
>>>>>> the OpenID
>>>>>> community's purpose;
>>>>>> (c) a determination that the proposed WG
>>>> does not
>>>>>> have sufficient
>>>>>> support to succeed
>>>>>>
>>>>>> or to deliver proposed deliverables
>>>> within
>>>>>> projected
>>>>>> completion dates; or
>>>>>> (d) a determination that the proposal is
>>>> likely
>>>>>> to cause legal
>>>>>> liability for the OIDF or others.
>>>>>> and should state why the proposal falls
>>>> into one
>>>>>> of the criteria
>>>>>> concretely and accountably.
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> =nat
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 7:58 AM, Josh Hoyt
>>>>>> <josh at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com><mailto:josh at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com>>
>>>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com><mailto:josh at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com>>>
>>>>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com><mailto:josh at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com>>
>>>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com><mailto:josh at janrain.com
>>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Mike Jones
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>>>>
>>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com><mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>>>>
>>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com><mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>>>>
>>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com><mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>>>>
>>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com><mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I realize it was Christmas week but it's been a
>>>>>> week and we've
>>>>>> heard nothing
>>>>>>> from any of the other specs council members on
>>>>>> this proposal (or
>>>>>> the other
>>>>>>> one as well).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with the statement that you made about
>>>> this
>>>>>> proposal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Josh
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Nat Sakimura (=nat)
>>>>>> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Nat Sakimura
>>>> (=nat)
>>>>>> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Nat Sakimura (=nat)
>>>> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
>>> d nothing
>>>>>>> from any of the other specs council members on
>>>>>> this proposal (or
>>>>>> the other
>>>>>>> one as well).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with the statement that you made about
>>>> this
>>>>>> proposal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Josh
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Nat Sakimura (=nat)
>>>>>> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Nat Sakimura
>>>> (=nat)
>>>>>> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Nat Sakimura (=nat)
>>>> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
>>
>
More information about the specs-council
mailing list