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

That's a tricky question - maybe one google can help answer? There are a
bunch of projects using webfinger, including status.net, ostatus in
general, diaspora, unhosted, freedombox(?), and I'm sure others, but I have
no idea how that translates into actual users or profiles.

Gmail, aol, and yahoo all put up webfinger endpoints, but there hasn't been
much movement, I think due to the chicken and egg nature of adoption around
decentralized tools.

b.
On Apr 17, 2012 11:13 AM, "Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:

> What is the deployment status of these two specs?  Is either deployed
> much at all?  -T
>
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy <msk@cloudmark.com>
> wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:
> apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Farrell
> >> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 9:23 AM
> >> To: oauth@ietf.org WG
> >> Cc: Apps Discuss
> >> Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] [OAUTH-WG] Web Finger vs. Simple Web
> Discovery (SWD)
> >>
> >> So Hannes and Derek and I have been discussing this with the Apps ADs
> >> and Apps-area WG chairs. I've also read the docs now, and after all
> >> that we've decided that this topic (what to do with swd and webfinger)
> >> is best handled in the apps area and not in the oauth WG.
> >>
> >> The logic for that is that 1) the two proposals are doing the same
> >> thing and we don't want two different standards for that, b) this is
> >> not an oauth-specific thing nor is it a general security thing, and c)
> >> there is clearly already interest in the topic in the apps area so its
> >> reasonable for the oauth wg to use that when its ready.
> >>
> >> The appsawg chairs and apps ADs are ok with the work being done there.
> >>
> >> So:-
> >>
> >> - I've asked the oauth chairs to take doing work on swd
> >>   out of the proposed new charter
> >> - It may be that you want to add something saying that
> >>   oauth will use the results of work in the applications
> >>   area on a web discovery protocol as a basis for doing
> >>   the dynamic client registration work here
> >> - Discussion of webfinger and swd should move over to
> >>   the apps-discuss list
> >> - Note: this is not picking one or the other approach,
> >>   the plan is that the apps area will do any selection
> >>   needed and figure out the best starting point for a
> >>   standards-track RFC on web discovery and we'll use their
> >>   fine work for doing more with oauth.
> >
> > Thank you Stephen, I think.  :-)
> >
> > So the discussion on apps-discuss now should be focused on which of the
> two should be the basis for forward progress.  I've placed both documents
> in "Call for Adoption" state in the datatracker for appsawg.
> >
> > Let the games begin.
> >
> > -MSK
> > _______________________________________________
> > apps-discuss mailing list
> > apps-discuss@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>