Re: [ogpx] A Review of Multi-Domain Use Cases [Was: Re: OpenID and OGP : beginning the discussion ...]

Meadhbh Siobhan <meadhbh.siobhan@gmail.com> Mon, 29 June 2009 15:01 UTC

Return-Path: <meadhbh.siobhan@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ogpx@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ogpx@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5279628C0EE for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:01:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.301, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_36=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_54=0.6]
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 L-6NNZe-vCnB for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:01:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yx0-f182.google.com (mail-yx0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DED73A6A32 for <ogpx@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:01:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yxe12 with SMTP id 12so1208867yxe.29 for <ogpx@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=OmXotDpkKSElWqKhrozmyxwiUpEZRUZ03WskEi6WZtQ=; b=CWLuiWSdMUTSsj63SqEI3XjaVpHNtCpIFVfYu1sP/kc15cSuZ0nUnSiPNf2tH07SZo xWAHaiFB8lMGb4qk8utvrPboE1EP/2E/dSRPqosxHzK36caELVP14DEy7EM/fTe6dZ6E +/dHsI2vKDa9izyYbBPyMn5vjPZd4l7J4chmQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=NAczdWL5GA1j/Yooowji8Wd49g7G3Kpb0xWqZgzGBEIihvkdrEX5K2XDH/ZGBcGtTs mVwB9++RLkQgkHp6q/62bDzPRmTwIEeeb8Mfi39Y6rJdhpFmi/afJX4l0K/yEfvrJl3h 0oIUBSUv1M/VkXnlHnnbomMnEU/wQY4SaYUmw=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.6.16 with SMTP id 16mr9268698anf.52.1246287678155; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4A48C9E6.6080705@comlounge.net>
References: <3a880e2c0906280906i2cdcdaa3m3c1b1ef54e4e5fcb@mail.gmail.com> <20090629105140.GA1053@alinoe.com> <b8ef0a220906290413u5a7358eao300c2ff8ee1ab709@mail.gmail.com> <20090629114512.GC1053@alinoe.com> <1246283091.4197.69.camel@mdickson-laptop> <4A48C9E6.6080705@comlounge.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:01:18 -0700
Message-ID: <b8ef0a220906290801p1f6eeceft6d2c1ace1390ba3b@mail.gmail.com>
From: Meadhbh Siobhan <meadhbh.siobhan@gmail.com>
To: Christian Scholz <cs@comlounge.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Infinity Linden <infinity@lindenlab.com>, "ogpx@ietf.org" <ogpx@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ogpx] A Review of Multi-Domain Use Cases [Was: Re: OpenID and OGP : beginning the discussion ...]
X-BeenThere: ogpx@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Virtual Worlds and the Open Grid Protocol <ogpx.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx>, <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ogpx>
List-Post: <mailto:ogpx@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx>, <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:01:01 -0000

if you implement an agent domain, you may choose to do this, but in
the same way that RFC822 and it's successors didn't require your email
address to be first initial + last name + @ + fqdn, i don't think it's
appropriate for a protocol to require a naming structure for the
virtual world.

we SHOULD definitely try to create a system by which you can publish a
URL for your agent (like http://example.org/Oh/Meadhbh or
http://example.com/MeadhbhOh) that is memorable and will yield a HTML
page with info about the agent, but also accepts LLSD messages for
things like "give me the user's public profile in LLSD" or "i'm a
trusted region domain, give me a capability i can use to return items
to the user's inventory". Further, i would add, that client
applications SHOULD respond to redirects when accessing these
resources. That way, if my agent domain _really_ wanted to export
something as http://example.org/a/BDFB8691-9FD5-444A-B601-4075E7226242
and then expose multiple URLs like http://example.org/Oh/Meadhbh and
http://example.org/Hamrick/Meadhbh, they COULD do that. (thought it
wouldn't be required that an agent domain do that.)

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 7:04 AM, Christian Scholz<cs@comlounge.net> wrote:
> Mike Dickson wrote:
>> I have to agree with Carlo on this.  This is a case where virtual life
>> needs to model real life.  Lots of people with the same name in the
>> world.  The protocol needs to support some other way to uniquely
>> identify a "user" other than FN/LN.
>
> I would also go further and say that it would be great to reuse
> identities on non-3D social networks. As we see with OpenID this usually
> is done via URLs (like myspace.com/mrtopf and now also
> facebook.com/mrtopf) and I don't see why this shouldn't be used here as
> well.
> firstname/lastname should be provided as well of course (e.g. via
> reading it over an OpenSocial REST API) but the real identity is then
> defined via the URL. I am not sure where to display it though, if
> directly over an avatar or inside the profile page but that needs some
> experimentation I guess. At least some means need to be given to find
> out which person it actually is.
>
> -- Christian
>
>> When crossing into a new region it seems highly possible that a region
>> owner may want to require a re-authentication also.
>>
>> I'm not suggesting a solution becaus this isn't my personal area of
>> expertise.  Simply stating I see the problem and agree a good solution
>> needs to be found.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 11:45 +0000, Carlo Wood wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 04:13:08AM -0700, Meadhbh Siobhan wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 3:51 AM, Carlo Wood<carlo@alinoe.com> wrote:
>>>> as mentioned in the draft, deployers MAY choose to identify users via
>>>> account ids rather than first+last.
>>> But that is local to the deployers.
>>>
>>> What is used to ID an agent in the server-server protocol
>>> when a user walks from one region into another, or teleports
>>> to a different region?
>>>
>>> Firstname Lastname should be merely payload, not interesting
>>> to the servers, not being used for anything except passing
>>> it on the the viewers so they can use it to put in the tags.
>>>
>>> There must be some other string, that is globally unique,
>>> that is used to ID the agent. I was missing that string
>>> in the first post that started this.
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ogpx mailing list
>> ogpx@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx
>
>
> --
> Christian Scholz                          Homepage: http://comlounge.net
> COM.lounge GmbH                              blog: http://mrtopf.de/blog
> Hanbrucher Str. 33                                       Skype: HerrTopf
> 52064 Aachen                             Video Blog: http://comlounge.tv
> Tel: +49 241 400 730 0                           E-Mail cs@comlounge.net
> Fax: +49 241 979 00 850                               IRC: MrTopf, Tao_T
>
> neuer Podcast: Der OpenWeb-Podcast (http://openwebpodcast.de)
> new podcast: Data Without Borders (http://datawithoutborders.net)
>
>