IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Txauth] Name suggestion for next round...

Vijay IETF <vijay.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 28 May 2020 15:43 UTC

Return-Path: <vijay.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: txauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: txauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 004633A0E89 for <txauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 May 2020 08:43:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IpLc_L-UpY9x for <txauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 May 2020 08:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-x134.google.com (mail-il1-x134.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E33F3A0FBD for <txauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 May 2020 08:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-x134.google.com with SMTP id q18so596554ilm.5 for <txauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 May 2020 08:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=XcHg2Q/yLBZZ5FC0rXfU1laNMS1ew8bG9GS+/xyRLFw=; b=foX/Z8CsEffOdr2GDdBxYiVWUQAVGvsXgSrf4iA5pJo9JMPCE4svpeRt4eiY3Nh3tj 6CgN9KaSIJpzzGuTz4YiAMrIon2YnTrfMZaJVxCad6L/7XeRUBidpy+uUy3vA94Gcppg 42KQ2O8OaN+OUZ/FnlaM+WOdzvco868MQJ0geb37fOgkHIOGht0yKMOFbw6phujtRyp0 TxFNn8GoBGTbf2vRwYSYWO0zWGL/l1S5FLAqIi7hx5d597RmJ5Xj4ZB/Y+bbdIPtA7Rr sATo9bEieYIheeCpX4ixvxOuGXWzZRCZT8SOzgE0uvFvX7QqWyn3CZmsaEFI0zuliCym zbfg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=XcHg2Q/yLBZZ5FC0rXfU1laNMS1ew8bG9GS+/xyRLFw=; b=Fa+Ty9PrSEzqGALen1Eiqc0ExcNC9WI7Mwtifa4AXvsjaiEOW7+OibQ5fez3PMUCIZ RaJSiy+88iYjMrcapJFjqeL/nEipv/MTpdcVtAmvI39wkgLUPlcOAYIfMSjtcXWH0c+g wyHDwIyILkMTxDbhS+p437tOshcIqppUWMeYHNz5rrlRRCLsJDEO5CZliih9nlbtcF+K LBjQRZWLyg2m8EaB544a0TI4utgGQlfWE8Y69zo4LoVxojlSJErgsYMsUKequN9QfEoV AoeevTgI2arliXNwD7i5wj827MwzG+HZyGP2KdgxAMAHhTywBOAwWsCbMjnyQcBNoD+G JGaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533YBe26ypKDsy85eXX93OFRpWBh6L7nJ1Ixxc5lf7HuLO/iUSgx zfXSy5d/APiDmXW0uwpfezLR2CdXtPCZTGp0bDs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJym5IxUEFU/3e7IB87FZVs63WaD9khpwpgGs0WCJxjApKl1XW+3H3SV3GWrz4CJht530utp85vbuUH4y1sYgFU=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:cc1:: with SMTP id c1mr3456731ilj.260.1590680603723; Thu, 28 May 2020 08:43:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAEADennZGfNKh0VMOMihYgkMvjqXygOp=JhO9m9mpLnfsxjJYw@mail.gmail.com> <BB68C005-6CA7-48B3-801B-2117E3A39593@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <BB68C005-6CA7-48B3-801B-2117E3A39593@mit.edu>
From: Vijay IETF <vijay.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 21:13:12 +0530
Message-ID: <CAEADenm2MUbHT10wiut8NSV=XqPyJBtHjQp+Md8958DeiSkmtw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu>
Cc: txauth@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000056131105a6b730ed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/txauth/n5-2mmSwTNca9b3MA_X_Fm8yDW8>
Subject: Re: [Txauth] Name suggestion for next round...
X-BeenThere: txauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <txauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/txauth>, <mailto:txauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/txauth/>
List-Post: <mailto:txauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:txauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/txauth>, <mailto:txauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 15:43:27 -0000

Hi Justin,

Thanks. My bad. Suggesting a name of a company that exists is a
terrible idea. I should have done my homework. Sorry about that!

Was flooded by DNSOP WG emails and lost track of the cut-off dates and the
name selection process thread.

I give up. Naming is hard.

I do find the process to "strongly object" in order to eliminate a popular
vote a bit odd.

Is there a precedent for this mode of selection in any setting within IETF?
Genuinely curious since I am new to the working internals of IETF.


On Thu, 28 May 2020 at 20:07, Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu> wrote:

> Hi Vijay,
>
> Sorry to say this, but according to the process put forward by the chairs,
> the cut-off for suggesting new names has already passed. Now the group is
> looking for feedback on the existing list of candidates, not for additional
> candidates.
>
> In addition, AuthX is an existing company name in this space:
> https://www.authx.com/
>
>  — Justin
>
> > On May 28, 2020, at 5:38 AM, Vijay IETF <vijay.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to suggest AuthX for inclusion in the next round...
> >
> > Why AuthX?
> >
> > The group's draft charter includes concepts, not in words but perhaps by
> induction, from the realms of identity, authorization, and authentication.
> >
> > 1. The X in AuthX indicates that.
> > 2. It's simple.
> > 3. Avoids the unproductive conversations on the semantics of Transaction.
> > 4. It indicates that the group is open to exploring all things X (known,
> unknown) wrt identity, authorization, authentication.
> >
> > No matter how narrow we try to scope the charter down, those are
> inescapable and related concepts.
> >
> > Witness the massive confusion thrust upon developers arising from OIDC
> and OAuth2 specifications coming from two different organizations on
> concepts that in my mind are inseparable from a systems perspective.
> >
> > Specifications that are not self contained are confusing at minimum. And
> do a disservice to the wider community at worst when they punt on something
> fundamental and related as being out of scope.
> >
> > If we are breaking from the past then it behoves upon us to not repeat
> the mistakes from the past.
> >
> > - Vijay
> > --
> > Txauth mailing list
> > Txauth@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/txauth
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email