[Openid-specs-risc] Question on delivery methods

[Tim Cappalli]

Hey Phil – thanks for bringing this up. I don't believe the secevent RFCs say how they should be referenced.

Are you suggesting we should reference the RFC numbers instead of URIs?

Tim

From: Openid-specs-risc <openid-specs-risc-bounces at lists.openid.net> on behalf of Phillip Hunt via Openid-specs-risc <openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net>
Date: Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 14:28
To: OpenID RISC List <openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net>
Subject: [Openid-specs-risc] Question on delivery methods
Looking at the shared signals framework spec (https://openid.net/specs/openid-sse-framework-1_0-ID1.html<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fopenid-sse-framework-1_0-ID1.html&data=05%7C01%7Ctim.cappalli%40microsoft.com%7Cd06ecf65fc4e4cfd040a08da81470ecf%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637964441246055504%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vU9qrwiM04aC1lRqA43HAupl9ghRGA2ss5q%2B1oU%2Bvfs%3D&reserved=0>),

I noticed the delivery methods are not RFC8935/8936 (as per the SECEVENTS specs) but instead are:
https://schemas.openid.net/secevent/risc/delivery-method/push<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fsecevent%2Frisc%2Fdelivery-method%2Fpush&data=05%7C01%7Ctim.cappalli%40microsoft.com%7Cd06ecf65fc4e4cfd040a08da81470ecf%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637964441246055504%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=8dBaPzuXSlhURhwyC40MW%2F%2B5Le2iVNAbQ2UcryzkrW8%3D&reserved=0>
https://schemas.openid.net/secevent/risc/delivery-method/poll<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fsecevent%2Frisc%2Fdelivery-method%2Fpoll&data=05%7C01%7Ctim.cappalli%40microsoft.com%7Cd06ecf65fc4e4cfd040a08da81470ecf%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637964441246055504%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fh%2Be0K4rK0ezQOxH%2FxV8FcWWAYr%2BHqkgEl6GmZf%2FTEA%3D&reserved=0>
Is there a difference between these methods and RFC8935, RFC8936?  If they are different, is there a specification for these methods?  Near as I can tell, the CISCO shared signals implementation is the same.

Thanks,

Phillip Hunt
@independentid
phil.hunt at independentid.com<mailto:phil.hunt at independentid.com>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-risc/attachments/20220818/895a9cc7/attachment-0001.html>