Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rechartering

Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com> Mon, 13 September 2010 18:59 UTC

Return-Path: <bcampbell@pingidentity.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27AA23A6AAD for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 11:59:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.822
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.822 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.155, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E3JQ1j-66qUG for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 11:59:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na3sys009aog102.obsmtp.com (na3sys009aog102.obsmtp.com [74.125.149.69]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C031B3A6AAA for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 11:59:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from source ([209.85.161.44]) by na3sys009aob102.postini.com ([74.125.148.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTI50mg+fKDdtt3HU6BWBTdbysbTFAUbN@postini.com; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 11:59:42 PDT
Received: by fxm18 with SMTP id 18so3935339fxm.31 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 11:59:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.223.112.206 with SMTP id x14mr3621394fap.89.1284404377215; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 11:59:37 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.113.3 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 11:59:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <DADD7EAD88AB484D8CCC328D40214CCD01C353D2E2@EXPO10.exchange.mit.edu>
References: <4C8C17F9.9050908@gmx.net> <DADD7EAD88AB484D8CCC328D40214CCD01C353D2E2@EXPO10.exchange.mit.edu>
From: Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:59:07 -0600
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=YPd1i7UnEVbNS5tfk7bqCrsKx-E-ZX5ysHsTU@mail.gmail.com>
To: Thomas Hardjono <hardjono@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rechartering
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 18:59:17 -0000

Thanks Thomas,

With respect to
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-campbell-oauth-saml/, I'm
planning on updating it to come inline with draft -11 when it's
published as well as a couple other updates related to subject conf
and subject that have been discussed on this list.  As it stands, I'm
fine as author/editor of that and can always benefit from review.
There may well be other SAML related work coming soon, however, that
might be in need of author(s).

Thanks,
Brian

On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Thomas Hardjono <hardjono@mit.edu> wrote:
>
> Hannes,
>
> I strongly believe that SAML support in Outh2.0 and "SAML-interoperability" is crucial in getting Oauth accepted and deployed in high-assurance (high-value) environments (eg. government, financials).
>
> As such, if its ok with Brian, I would be willing to either co-author or review the SAML-related drafts.
>
>
> ps. Apologies for stating the obvious, but I think the new charter/recharter should define clearly what is expected as deliverable(s) from the OAUTH WG in regards to SAML support.
>
> Thanks.
>
> /thomas/
>
> __________________________
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: oauth-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
>> Of Hannes Tschofenig
>> Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2010 8:00 PM
>> To: oauth@ietf.org
>> Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Rechartering
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> at the Washington Internet Identity Workshop we had the chance to chat
>> about OAuth. Given the progress on the main specification we should
>> discuss WG re-chartering.
>>
>> The following items had been proposed at the meeting:
>>
>> * Messaging Signing
>> Example: http://www.ietf.org/mail-
>> archive/web/oauth/current/msg04250.html
>>
>> * User Experience Extensions
>> Example: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-recordon-oauth-v2-ux/
>>
>> * Artifact Binding
>> Example: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sakimura-oauth-requrl/
>>
>> * SAML for OAuth
>> Example: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-campbell-oauth-saml/
>>
>> * Recommendations of commonly used Scope values No draft available (to
>> my knowledge)
>>
>> * Dynamic Client Registration
>> Example: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-oauth-dyn-reg-v1-00.txt
>>
>> I am interested to hear
>> a) what items are important for you; we cannot work on everything at
>> the same time.
>> b) what items are you willing to co-author (requires a hard time
>> commitment)
>> c) what items are you willing to review
>> d) whether we should consider other items?
>>
>> Btw, to have your work considered you have to submit an IETF draft.
>> Please use the Web tool to upload it:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/idst/upload.cgi
>> Also use the following filename convention:
>> draft-[author last name]-oauth-[some short name]-[version#].txt
>>
>> Ciao
>> Hannes
>> _______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list
>> OAuth@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>