[Openid-specs-risc] FW: [Id-event] subject-identifers WG interest (Was: Closing the SecEvent working group)

Mon Jul 6 20:55:18 UTC 2020

Hi Mike!

FYI, if the work does not happen in the SecEvent WG, it can still be
standardized in the IETF with the ISE process:

https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/independent/

/Dick

On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 1:44 PM Atul Tulshibagwale via Openid-specs-risc <
openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
> Thanks for highlighting the urgency on this.
>
> Is it possible for me to create an updated version of the spec, given the
> voluminous nature of the changes? This corresponds to sections 4-6 of this
> SSE draft (still being reviewed in the WG and not ready for general
> commentary):
>
> Atul
>
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 12:49 PM Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
>> If you want to see the Subject Identifiers spec finish, please send a
>> review of the spec to the id-event at ietf.org.  Both say what you like and
>> what you’d like to see change.  Please try to do it this week so that we’re
>> not taking this down to the wire.
>>
>>
>>
>> Many of you should really want this work to finish, since RISC and I
>> think CAEP have dependencies on it!
>>
>>
>>
>> BTW, some of you might be thinking “Why don’t we just do this in the SSE
>> working group?”  The problem is that the spec establishes an IANA registry,
>> which requires an RFC.  So we have to do this work in the IETF.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please help make that happen!
>>
>>
>>
>>                                                        -- Mike
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Id-event <id-event-bounces at ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Dick Hardt
>> *Sent:* Monday, July 6, 2020 10:00 AM
>> *To:* Atul Tulshibagwale <atultulshi=40google.com at dmarc.ietf.org>
>> *Cc:* Bjorn Hjelm <bjorn.hjelm at verizonwireless.com>; Yaron Sheffer <
>> yaronf.ietf at gmail.com>; id-event at ietf.org; Richard Backman, Annabelle
>> <richanna=40amazon.com at dmarc.ietf.org>
>> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [Id-event] subject-identifers WG interest
>> (Was: Closing the SecEvent working group)
>>
>>
>>
>> Yaron and I have discussed keeping the WG going to work on the
>> subject-identifiers draft. We were both disappointed in the previous
>> feedback from the WG in the two WGLCs we had for the document.
>>
>>
>>
>> With more people chiming in at this time, we have decided to check if
>> there is renewed WG interest in subject-identifiers. To gauge the interest,
>> we would like to see substantive feedback on the latest draft[1] from
>> numerous people in the next two weeks. The cutoff will be July 20, 18:00
>> PDT. If we do not see substantial feedback, we will close the WG and assist
>> Annabelle in publishing with the ISE.
>>
>>
>>
>> Dick and Yaron
>>
>>
>>
>>  [1]
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-secevent-subject-identifiers-05
>>
>>
>>
>> Note this draft has expired, but still suits our purpose of
>> gauging interest.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 10:07 AM Atul Tulshibagwale <atultulshi=
>> 40google.com at dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>> I would also like this work to be completed. We're working on
>> subject-type changes in the SSE spec, so those can be incorporated into
>> this spec.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm happy to do this work within the SecEvents group.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Atul
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 2:47 AM Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Sorry folks. We decided that this draft does not have WG support back in
>> August, because it clearly did not have such support. Yes there are
>> obviously people who want to see it published as an RFC. But not enough for
>> any meaningful discussion during the WG last call (or even a positive
>> response before the WGLC expired, we had exactly one). Nor any discussion
>> since then. Nor a new draft version published since late July 2019.
>>
>>
>>
>> Let me remind the group that the IETF offers two alternatives for
>> publication, either AD-sponsored or through the ISE.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>                 Yaron
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Bjorn Hjelm <bjorn.hjelm at verizonwireless.com>
>> *Date: *Friday, July 3, 2020 at 05:29
>> *To: *"Richard Backman, Annabelle" <richanna=40amazon.com at dmarc.ietf.org>
>> *Cc: *Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf at gmail.com>, "id-event at ietf.org" <
>> id-event at ietf.org>
>> *Subject: *Re: [E] Re: [Id-event] Closing the SecEvent working group
>>
>>
>>
>> Annabelle,
>>
>> I would like to see this work being completed.
>>
>> BR,
>>
>> Bjorn
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jul 2, 2020, at 3:59 PM, Richard Backman, Annabelle <richanna=
>> 40amazon.com at dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>> I’d like to hear from the working group on whether or not there is
>> interest in completing the Subject Identifiers draft  within secevents.
>> This work has more or less been put on hiatus given the chairs’ previous
>> decision not to continue with it within the working group, but it remains a
>> dependency for other work, and a number of people within the working group
>> have expressed interest and support for it previously. If there is support
>> within the working group for resuming and completing Subject Identifiers,
>> then it would seem reasonable to me to do so within secevents.
>>
>>
>>
>> –
>>
>> Annabelle Backman (she/her)
>>
>> AWS Identity
>>
>> https://aws.amazon.com/identity/
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__aws..amazon.com_identity_&d=DwMGaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=NMZJHCV8pjvGIH2fTx9z6l7g7-V-a2xW7ISf9uHdz0A&m=JdLD0MPKiH-cnYaRWq00dc9RaqFuwKAR2s9Y6qctmCY&s=sg2xiXxfFuwR2T2OCtgdsW708HRdK2DeOSvVtx3HhKo&e=>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Id-event <id-event-bounces at ietf.org> on behalf of Yaron Sheffer <
>> yaronf.ietf at gmail.com>
>> *Date: *Tuesday, June 30, 2020 at 2:06 AM
>> *To: *"id-event at ietf.org" <id-event at ietf..org <id-event at ietf.org>>
>> *Subject: *[EXTERNAL] [Id-event] Closing the SecEvent working group
>>
>>
>>
>> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do
>> not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and
>> know the content is safe.
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear WG participants,
>>
>>
>>
>> As you’ve all seen, our last two deliverables, the SET HTTP delivery
>> specs, have both been approved for publication as RFCs.
>>
>>
>>
>> Since the group has now completed its mission, we propose to close it
>> down. Unless there are objections (accompanied by credible work items)
>> within a week, we will ask the AD to do just that.. Even with the WG shut
>> down, the mailing list will remain open for relevant discussions.
>>
>>
>>
>> We would like to thank the authors of the Push and Poll soon-to-be RFCs,
>> Annabelle, Mike, Marius, Morteza and Anthony. Many thanks also to the many
>> other working group members who contributed to these quality documents.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>>                 Dick and Yaron
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Id-event mailing list
>> Id-event at ietf.org <Id-event at ietf..org>
>>
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_id-2Devent&d=DwICAg&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=NMZJHCV8pjvGIH2fTx9z6l7g7-V-a2xW7ISf9uHdz0A&m=JdLD0MPKiH-cnYaRWq00dc9RaqFuwKAR2s9Y6qctmCY&s=ruzxNhwgDEh8N2N1ayOzTrCx8t1W3gLrz39-Jny_mhc&e=
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Id-event mailing list
>> Id-event at ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/id-event
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Id-event mailing list
>> Id-event at ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/id-event
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Openid-specs-risc mailing list
> Openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-risc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-risc/attachments/20200706/70fada96/attachment.html>