OpenID extensions must be carried by indirect messages (through the browser). If you're looking for ways for server-to-server communication to get attributes, I suggest you look at OAuth. Specifically perhaps the OpenID+OAuth extension, which could enable the RP to send the request directly to the OP for these large payloads you're talking about.<div>
<br clear="all">--<br>Andrew Arnott<br>"I [may] not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." - S. G. Tallentyre<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Nat Sakimura <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sakimura@gmail.com">sakimura@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Hmmm. So, there is no way we can do direct communication in an extension? <div>What I want to do is to send the large payload directly between the servers and move only the reference through OpenID Authn request and response so that </div>
<div><br></div><div>1) mobile clients will not choke. </div><div>2) is going to be more secure. </div><div><br></div><div>In AX, there is a notion of update_url, but is that also used only for indirect communication through browser? </div>
<div><br></div><div>I feel that it is extremely limiting if we cannot do the server to server communication. </div><div><br></div><div>If that is not a possibility, then I should probably do the server to server portion elsewhere, and just do the reference/artifact moving through OpenID AuthN, but that sounds like OpenID strangling itself. </div>
<div><br></div><div>=nat<div class="im"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 11:01 PM, James Henstridge <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:james@jamesh.id.au" target="_blank">james@jamesh.id.au</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Nat Sakimura<<a href="mailto:sakimura@gmail.com" target="_blank">sakimura@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> I blogged bout the subject here:<br>
> <a href="http://www.sakimura.org/en/modules/wordpress/index.php?p=91" target="_blank">http://www.sakimura.org/en/modules/wordpress/index.php?p=91</a><br>
><br>
> What would be the consensus here?<br>
<br>
</div>My reading of the spec (and what I believe is the author's intent) is<br>
that OpenID extensions do indeed piggyback on an authentication<br>
request. The note about including the extension's type URI in XRDS is<br>
a way that an OpenID provider can advertise support for the extension.<br>
<br>
Note that in OpenID 2.0, sending openid.identifier in an<br>
authentication request is optional. So you could potentially use an<br>
extension without actually authenticating as a particular user. From<br>
section 9.1:<br>
<br>
"""<br>
"openid.claimed_id" and "openid.identity" SHALL be either both present<br>
or both absent. If neither value is present, the assertion is not<br>
about an identifier, and will contain other information in its<br>
payload, using extensions (Extensions).<br>
"""<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
James.<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br></div>-- <br><font color="#888888">Nat Sakimura (=nat)</font><div class="im"><br><a href="http://www.sakimura.org/en/" target="_blank">http://www.sakimura.org/en/</a><br>
</div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
specs mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:specs@lists.openid.net">specs@lists.openid.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs" target="_blank">http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>