Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering

[John Bradley <[e-mail]>]

There is not intention to bring the openID Connect work to the OAuth WG.
It like many other protocols rely on OAuth 2.0 but are not part of it.

However if there are some things that we are doing as OAuth 2.0 extensions
that are more general and can be standardized in the IETF, we should understand 
what they are.  

We are having a openID Connect meeting on Sunday prior to IETF.
People are encouraged to attend and refine opinions about the appropriate homes
for some of this new(to IETF) work.

Registration is at:
http://www.eventbrite.com/event/3064019565

The account chooser WG that Blaine mentioned at OIDF is up and running now, with a online meeting happening 
Thursday for those that are interested.
https://sites.google.com/site/oidfacwg/
http://acwg2012march-estw.eventbrite.com

So +1 for composition.

John B.

On 2012-03-19, at 12:24 PM, Blaine Cook wrote:

> On 15 March 2012 17:31, Zeltsan, Zachary (Zachary)
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> ...  Considering OpenID Connect as a motivating use case for OAuth, SWD is
>> the one spec that would then be missing for this OAuth use case.
> 
> I worry that bringing OpenID Connect into OAuth (rather than building
> upon OAuth) will have detrimental effects for both efforts. OAuth is
> successful in part because we chose not to push OAuth-like
> functionality into the OpenID umbrella (which at the time was focused
> on shipping OpenID 2.0).
> 
> It seems prudent to learn from the experience of WS-*, where
> everything was combined into one huge ball of standards-wax. The
> result was both impenetrable and not fit for purpose due to the many
> interdependencies (both social and technical) involved.
> 
> Composition has served the IETF and the internet well, and nothing
> prevents the OpenID standards from being created in the context of a
> new working group, or from within the OpenID foundation. Indeed, it's
> been working quite well, and projects like the Account Chooser are
> showing great promise and focusing on the important things (UX) rather
> than specifications-for-specification's sake.
> 
> b.
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth