[OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group

[n-sakimura]

OK with me as well.

(2013/07/25 8:02), John Bradley wrote:
> Fine with me.
>
> On 2013-07-24, at 6:44 PM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>> wrote:
>
>> I’m fine with that.  What about the other specs council members and
>> proposers?
>> *From:*openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net
>> <mailto:openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net>[mailto:openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net
>> <mailto:specs-bounces at lists.openid.net>]*On Behalf Of*Chuck Mortimore
>> *Sent:*Wednesday, July 24, 2013 3:31 PM
>> *To:*Lewis Adam-CAL022
>> *Cc:*specs at openid.net
>> <mailto:specs at openid.net>;specs-council at openid.net
>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net>
>> *Subject:*Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group
>> Opening discussion again to help push this to completion.
>> I'm still not comfortable with "single authorization" as I believe
>> it's antithetical to what we actually need to build.      I do believe
>> SSO best describes the use-cases, but I'm willing to drop it to
>> achieve agreement.
>> How about we drop all the qualifiers and simply call it the: *Native
>> Application Working Group*- it's high level and independent of
>> implementation, other than we're working on concerns for native apps.
>>   We can start with the current scope and it's easily re-charterable
>> down the road.
>> -cmort
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Lewis Adam-CAL022
>> <Adam.Lewis at motorolasolutions.com
>> <mailto:Adam.Lewis at motorolasolutions.com>> wrote:
>> +2
>> We have written our own such function as we indeed call it an “SSO
>> client.”  It’s what developers understand.  It’s what user’s
>> understand.  It’s what RFIs and RFPs call for.  At the end of the day
>> a name is just a name, but I personally find the name “native single
>> authorization agent” to be a bit confusing.
>> Let’s think about how this is intended to be used.  An mobile user
>> downloads a Twitter client, a Facebook client, a G+ client and some
>> other clients.  He signs on once and gets access to their information
>> on Twitter/Facebook/G+/other.  Developers will think of it the same
>> way.  It’s SSO across native apps.  Imagine if the SAML WebSSO profile
>> was named the SAML single authorization agent profile??J
>> adam
>> *From:*openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net
>> <mailto:openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net>[mailto:openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net
>> <mailto:openid-specs-bounces at lists.openid.net>]*On Behalf Of*Richard Sand
>> *Sent:*Thursday, July 18, 2013 12:00 PM
>> *To:*Ashish Jain
>> *Cc:*specs at openid.net
>> <mailto:specs at openid.net>;specs-council at openid.net
>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net>
>> *Subject:*Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group
>> +1. The name will impact potential adoption, foolish to think it
>> won't, and "SSO" is a commonly (mis)understood term and often appears
>> in business requirements, even though it is often a misnomer or
>> neglects other important related aspects such as log off, session
>> management etc. SSO is a name here, not a binding technical scope
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Jul 18, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Ashish Jain <email at ashishjain.com
>> <mailto:email at ashishjain.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     I still don't understand / agree with the objection on
>>     openid-specs-native-sso. That's the intent and the primary use
>>     case. It will be far more appealing / understandable to the mobile
>>     app developers than 'single authorization agent'.
>>     -- Ashish
>>
>>     On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Paul Madsen
>>     <paulmadsen at rogers.com <mailto:paulmadsen at rogers.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     oh and I guess I should have mentioned the plans for a PRISMA
>>     subgroup ......
>>
>>     On 7/17/13 7:51 PM, John Bradley wrote:
>>
>>         Ok you have a point. NSAA then.
>>
>>
>>
>>         I want it in red.
>>
>>
>>
>>         Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>>
>>         On 2013-07-17, at 7:28 PM, =JeffH<Jeff.Hodges at KingsMountain.com>  <mailto:Jeff.Hodges at KingsMountain.com>  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>                 request that the name be changed to "Native Single Authorization Agent", with
>>
>>                 the mailing list name openid-specs-nssa
>>
>>             but "Native Single Authorization Agent" yields "nsaa" rather than "nssa", yes?
>>
>>
>>
>>             thus "openid-specs-nsaa" ?
>>
>>
>>
>>             =JeffH
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>             _______________________________________________
>>
>>             specs mailing list
>>
>>             specs at lists.openid.net  <mailto:specs at lists.openid.net>
>>
>>             http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>
>>         specs mailing list
>>
>>         specs at lists.openid.net  <mailto:specs at lists.openid.net>
>>
>>         http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     specs mailing list
>>     specs at lists.openid.net <mailto:specs at lists.openid.net>
>>     http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     specs mailing list
>>     specs at lists.openid.net <mailto:specs at lists.openid.net>
>>     http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> specs mailing list
>> specs at lists.openid.net <mailto:specs at lists.openid.net>
>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> specs mailing list
> specs at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
>


-- 
Nat Sakimura (n-sakimura at nri.co.jp)
Nomura Research Institute, Ltd.
Tel:+81-3-6274-1412 Fax:+81-3-6274-1547

本メールに含まれる情報は機密情報であり、宛先に記載されている方のみに送信 
することを意図しております。意図された受取人以外の方によるこれらの情報の 
開示、複製、再配布や転送など一切の利用が禁止されています。誤って本メール 
を受信された場合は、申し訳ございませんが、送信者までお知らせいただき、受 
信されたメールを削除していただきますようお願い致します。
PLEASE READ:
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and intended 
for the named recipient(s) only.
If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby 
notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of 
this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message 
in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete your copy from 
your system.