<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<title>Re: OpenID Email Discovery</title>
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I’m sorry, Phillip, we’re not
going to let you get away with that one. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Drummond already asked you about what you
are talking about w/r/t IPR commitments, and I haven’t seen a reply. All
IPR commitments for XRI are in place and have been for quite a while. I
encourage you to review the “RF on Limited Terms” option (under
which the TC operates) of <a
href="http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php">http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I appreciate your technical discussion,
but please don’t drop the IPR FUD bomb without substantiation or
explanation. Thanks.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> -Gabe<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt'>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'> specs-bounces@openid.net
[mailto:specs-bounces@openid.net] <b><span style='font-weight:bold'>On Behalf
Of </span></b>Hallam-Baker, Phillip<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Thursday, January 03, 2008
3:03 PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> Peter Davis<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Cc:</span></b> OpenID specs list<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: OpenID Email
Discovery</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=2 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt'>NAPTR is an ietf proposed standard but there is no
deployed base. SRV has been supported in windows since 2000 and bind since
before then.<br>
<br>
XRI is a specification, not an OASIS recommendation. Until the IPR commitments
necessary to allow that change are made there is no standard.<br>
<br>
<br>
Sent from my GoodLink Wireless Handheld (www.good.com)<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Peter Davis [<a href="mailto:peter.davis@neustar.biz">mailto:peter.davis@neustar.biz</a>]<br>
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 02:07 PM Pacific Standard Time<br>
To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip<br>
Cc: Eran Hammer-Lahav; OpenID specs list<br>
Subject: Re: OpenID Email Discovery<br>
<br>
actually, NAPTR RR's would be a better fit, as the unique-part of an <br>
openID may be in the local-path part of a URI, not the hostname... of <br>
course, if a users openID changes, so too might their underlying DNS <br>
name, and then DNS won't help you at all there. XRI is better <br>
situated to solve that use case.<br>
<br>
=peterd<br>
<br>
On Jan 3, 2008, at 4:48 PM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:<br>
<br>
> This is the function of the existing DNS SRV record.<br>
><br>
> _openid.example.com SRV 1 1 1 1 openid1.example.com<br>
><br>
> The Internet has an architecture already. Use it, don't try to <br>
> reinvent it.<br>
><br>
> From: specs-bounces@openid.net on behalf of Eran Hammer-Lahav<br>
> Sent: Thu 03/01/2008 4:01 PM<br>
> To: 'OpenID specs list'<br>
> Subject: OpenID Email Discovery<br>
><br>
> (The full story is posted at <a
href="http://www.hueniverse.com/hueniverse/">http://www.hueniverse.com/hueniverse/</a><br>
> 2008/01/addressing-open.html but this contains the technical parts <br>
> of the post).<br>
><br>
><br>
> This proposal adds Email Discovery allowing users to use their <br>
> email address as an OpenID.<br>
><br>
><br>
> …<br>
><br>
><br>
> We need to map between the email to the OpenID identifier and this <br>
> is where DNS comes in. DNS already has a system for resolving email <br>
> addresses into an actual server – email resolution using an MX <br>
> record. Why not add a new record type for OpenID. Basically another <br>
> way to perform OpenID discovery that is all about making it user-<br>
> friendly.<br>
><br>
><br>
> All that is needed is a URL the site performing discovery can <br>
> append the email to and treat it as an OpenID identifier. This can <br>
> be done using a OpenID TXT record: ‘OpenID [username rule] <br>
> [priority] [URL]’ where [username rule] is a wildcard
expression <br>
> used to match the username part of the email (everything up to the <br>
> ‘@’), [priority] is the MX-like priority value, and [URL] is
the <br>
> URL used to generate the OpenID identifier. The URL uses ‘*’
to <br>
> indicate where the username is inserted, and ‘**’ to indicate
where <br>
> the full, URL-encoded, email address is inserted (both optional). <br>
> For example:<br>
><br>
><br>
> example.com TXT ‘OpenID * 10 <a
href="http://*.example.com/">http://*.example.com/</a>’<br>
><br>
> example.com TXT ‘OpenID joe 10 <a
href="http://example.org/openid?**">http://example.org/openid?**</a>’<br>
><br>
><br>
> Which reads: for any email address ‘@example.com’ other than
‘joe’ <br>
> use ‘<a href="http://username.example.com/">http://username.example.com/</a>’
as the OpenID identifier. For <br>
> email address ‘joe@example.com’ use ‘<a
href="http://example.org/openid?joe%25">http://example.org/openid?joe%</a><br>
> 40example.com’ as the OpenID identifier. Rules are processed
first <br>
> based on the username rule match (in order of match closeness) and <br>
> then on priority which is used in the same manner as MX records <br>
> priority.<br>
><br>
><br>
> …<br>
><br>
><br>
> There are many ways to implement identity delegation, but in the <br>
> context of email identifiers and simplifying the user experience, <br>
> the idea is to move the delegation mapping to the OpenID provider. <br>
> When users sign-up for a new OpenID, they will be given the option, <br>
> perhaps as a premium paid service, to make the OpenID provider map <br>
> incoming identity checks for the user email address with their <br>
> local OpenID identifier. So instead of the users telling the site <br>
> about their local identity (using delegation), the OpenID provider <br>
> will perform the mapping.<br>
><br>
><br>
> In the above example, ‘joe@example.com’ has his OpenID managed
by <br>
> ‘example.org’. When signing up for an OpenID at
‘example.org’, Joe <br>
> asked it to accept identity requests for ‘joe@example.com’ or
at <br>
> least provide delegation discovery. When Joe tries to log into an <br>
> OpenID-enabled site using ‘joe@example.com’, the site convert
the <br>
> email address to the URL ‘<a href="http://example.org/openid?joe%25">http://example.org/openid?joe%</a><br>
> 40example.com’ and use it like a regular OpenID identifier. <br>
> ‘example.org’ will reply with the needed discovery information
to <br>
> get Joe authenticated using the OpenID protocol. By using the
‘**’ <br>
> symbol, the full email address is sent over to the OpenID provider <br>
> which can perform mapping of identities other than its own local ones.<br>
><br>
><br>
> This can be viewed as hosted delegated identity where the OpenID <br>
> provider also provides hosting of the OpenID delegation information <br>
> for the user. It doesn’t require any new standards except for <br>
> implementation and support by OpenID providers.<br>
><br>
><br>
> ---<br>
><br>
><br>
> Would love to get some feedback.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Thanks,<br>
><br>
><br>
> EHL<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> specs mailing list<br>
> specs@openid.net<br>
> <a href="http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs">http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs</a></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>