Separation of Discovery from AuthN (was Proposal to form Discovery Working Group)

[Nat Sakimura]

But I suppose it is worthwhile to make the spec clearler.
It can be clearer by decomposeing the notion of OP into Discovery Service
and Authentication Service than collectively calling it as "OP". That will
facilitate a better understanding of the strength and weakness of the
protocol as well.

=nat

2009/1/6 Drummond Reed <drummond.reed at cordance.net>

>  Agreed that it makes sense to split it out when the underlying work (XRD
> 1.0) is ready.
>
>
>
> =Drummond
>
>
>   ------------------------------
>
> *From:* David Recordon [mailto:drecordon at sixapart.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, January 04, 2009 11:24 PM
> *To:* Drummond Reed
> *Cc:* sappenin at gmail.com; 'Nat Sakimura'; 'John Bradley'; specs at openid.net
> *Subject:* Re: Separation of Discovery from AuthN (was Proposal to form
> Discovery Working Group)
>
>
>
> I'd advocate for waiting until all of the discovery work occurring in
> OASIS, IETF, and W3C shakes out before we make changes to how OpenID
> discovery works.  I'd much rather make this sort of change once rather than
> twice.
>
>
>
> --David
>
>
>
> On Jan 4, 2009, at 11:14 PM, Drummond Reed wrote:
>
>
>
>    I'm just catching up on holiday mail and wanted to add another +1 to
> separation of Discovery from AuthN. The sooner the better…
>
>
>
> =Drummond
>
>
>   ------------------------------
>
> *From:* specs-bounces at openid.net [mailto:specs-bounces at openid.net<specs-bounces at openid.net>
> ] *On Behalf Of *David Fuelling
> *Sent:* Friday, December 26, 2008 8:47 AM
> *To:* Nat Sakimura
> *Cc:* John Bradley; specs at openid.net
> *Subject:* Re: Proposal to form Discovery Working Group
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Nat Sakimura <n-sakimura at nri.co.jp>
> wrote:
>
>  2. Separation of OP into Discovery Service and Authentication Service.
>  In the current terminology, OP spans both Discovery Service and
> Authentication Service.
>  We should be explicit about it.
>
>
> +1.  I would like to see discovery services separated from OP services too.
>
>
>
>
> John Bradley wrote:
> > Breno,
> >
> > I agree.  I recommended separating discovery into a separate doc for
> > 2.1.
> >
> > There didn't seem to be support for the idea at the time,  perhaps
> > circumstances have changed and the idea will be accepted now.
> >
> > Regards
> > John Bradley
> > =jbradley
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> specs mailing list
> specs at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> specs mailing list
> specs at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
>
>


-- 
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
http://www.sakimura.org/en/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs/attachments/20090106/2398504f/attachment-0002.htm>