Re: [OAUTH-WG] Web Finger vs. Simple Web Discovery (SWD)

[Igor Faynberg <[e-mail]>]

To me this looks like more than the same problem being solved--it 
appears to be the same protocol... I wonder if, the representation 
issues were put aside (i.e., left to the API specification), the common 
part is what can be adopted.

Igor

On 4/12/2012 8:01 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
>
> On 04/12/2012 12:00 PM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > those who had attended the last IETF meeting may have noticed the 
> ongoing activity in the 'Applications Area Working Group' regarding 
> Web Finger.
> > We had our discussion regarding Simple Web Discovery (SWD) as part 
> of the re-chartering process.
> >
> > Here are the two specifications:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-appsawg-webfinger-03
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-simple-web-discovery-02
> >
> > Now, the questions that seems to be hanging around are
> >
> >   1) Aren't these two mechanisms solving pretty much the same problem?
> >   2) Do we need to have two standards for the same functionality?
> >   3) Do you guys have a position or comments regarding either one of 
> them?
> >
> > Ciao
> > Hannes
> >
> > PS: Please also let me know if your view is: "I don't really know 
> what all this is about and the documents actually don't provide enough 
> requirements to make a reasonable judgement about the solution space."
> >
>
> So just as a data-point. We (the IETF, but including
> me personally;-) mucked up badly on this some years
> ago in the PKI space - we standardised both CMP (rfc
> 2510) and CMC (rfc 2797) as two ways to do the same
> thing, after a protracted battle between factions
> supporting one or the other. We even made sure they
> had as much common syntax as possible. (CRMF, rfc
> 2511)
>
> Result: neither fully adopted, lots of people still
> do proprietary stuff, neither can be killed off
> (despite attempts), both need to be maintained (CMP
> is now RFC 4210, CMC, 5272, CRMF, 4211), and IMO
> partly as a result of us screwing up for what seemed
> like good reasons at the time, PKI administration
> stuff has never gotten beyond horrible-to-do.
>
> All-in-all, a really bad outcome which is still
> a PITA a dozen years later.
>
> As OAuth AD I will need *serious* convincing that
> there is a need to provide two ways to do the same
> thing. I doubt it'll be possible to convince me,
> in fact, so if you wanna try, you'll need to start
> by saying that they are not in fact two ways to do
> the same thing:-)
>
> S.
>
> PS: This discussion needs to also involve the Apps
> area, so I've cc'd that list.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth