PROPOSAL: rename Identity Provider to OpenID Provider

[Granqvist, Hans]

-1

"OpenID provider" is too vague and makes little sense. What 
is provided?  OpenID?  How do you provide a specification?

Or...

If I am a browser with built in OpenID 2.0 authn support,
am I then not 'providing OpenID' to the user, so in effect
I am too an "OpenID provider", but now as a client?

Why not simply call the idp "idp", and prefix it "OpenID idp" 
if context or clarification is needed, all referencing an 
OpenID spec def of "OpenID idp"?

Hans


> -----Original Message-----
> From: specs-bounces at openid.net 
> [mailto:specs-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf Of Dick Hardt
> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 10:05 PM
> To: specs at openid.net
> Subject: PROPOSAL: rename Identity Provider to OpenID Provider
> 
> (writing this up so that it can go in David's proposal wiki :-)
> 
> Motivation:
> 
> * Liberty specifications use the term Identity Provider (IdP) 
> to refer to a site that provides any kind of identity 
> assertion about the user, and this term has come to have that 
> general meaning in the market. Since OpenID IdP only asserts 
> that a user has an OpenID, this leads to confusion about what 
> an OpenID IdP actually does.
> 
> * When asserting parties are introduced into the OpenID 
> specifications at a later time, they will also be IdPs, but 
> will need a different name since they are not doing what an 
> IdP does in OpenID.
> 
> Proposal:
> 
> Rename Identity Provider to OpenID Provider in the spec
> 
> Pros:
> 	+ clarity on what the IdP in the protocol does
> 	+ will provide clarity in future
> 
> Cons:
> 	- some simple search and replace needs to be done on the spec
> 	- people in the OpenID Community are used to using the term IdP
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> specs mailing list
> specs at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
> 
>