Re: [webfinger] Vision for Webfinger - what are we doing?

Eric Mill <> Wed, 16 October 2013 15:39 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E20811E8306 for <>; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 08:39:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bsN5Kzj2Y0vb for <>; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 08:39:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c00::22c]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC67B21F9D2A for <>; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 08:38:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id b47so455762eek.31 for <>; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 08:38:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=N16sxGc/j/9L+xrW5aoArCvqpM8TZkxmcGRe8+oyJ3M=; b=NSY5IECMcON1LfuXMfoROvPN2oSjPOjU2potm5AfFz4/Btiol4G7+X5BNpJ6Fla6e2 cNMirDsxf3ZIdSozOEfAwxqYHHjc8tv3mV8p9ePeMm2hhQnMAYea7HLaNejH2OF2JBmU bIOlAhLjh8jOzTOKJAslLNqGvP9Ccje7qFpagUwpE6d3Xp3KfKt7esJLz79Z/rFJSZCi y89AD2nZVBKOsGm+KrdkEHFw/Sn4NrhnVUXmBXhsWH3XTKGGHR6yccT/Z0CZDCpqm325 f2jruML34jCpBHi5AuLkny3KsBGbrmj2vPNHF8NSeNH1IXauafMEyDJXr2yw7PHqE1p6 Uq7Q==
X-Received: by with SMTP id bi9mr1725293eeb.67.1381937937847; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 08:38:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 08:38:17 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
From: Eric Mill <>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 11:38:17 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: V0Q-8A6M3jrjqkDkZTfVH1aQLSY
Message-ID: <>
To: "Paul E. Jones" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e01681470e31a1704e8dd7fbd"
Cc: "" <>,
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Vision for Webfinger - what are we doing?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 15:39:08 -0000

This is all helpful to hear, and I hope these all come to fruition,
especially OpenID Connect. I'll take a stab at setting up my own OpenID
Connect service on my domain and see how it feels.

I guess it's inevitable that we have to hope the big companies make a
meaningful gesture, too. Giving Google's outdated Webfinger
endpoint<> for
Gmail a big update would be a great start.

On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Paul E. Jones <>wrote:

>  Eric,
> OpenID is not entirely dead, yet.  I still run my own OpenID OP server and
> use it to log into some sites.  I still allow OpenID logins on
>, too.  It's still in use, but the large sites just
> didn't have enough users using it, so they axed it.  On its heels, though,
> is now OpenID Connect and it will use WebFinger for discovery.  so, sure...
> push it :-)
> Personally, I can think of a lot of good uses for WebFinger:
> * When I log onto a web site, I want the site to grab my name an picture
> automatically.
> * If I want somebody to send me bitcoins, I'd much rather give them my
> email address (and I do have that in my WF account)
> * My contact info is published via WebFinger, so I don't have to give
> people a lot of info on a business card
> * WebFinger will hopefully be used as the starting point for
> auto-provisioning of email clients or other devices and applications where
> one has to enter server and port information
> Paul
> On 10/14/2013 11:21 PM, Eric Mill wrote:
> Hey all,
>  I was at a hackathon <> today,
> and spent the day working on Webfinger libraries for Sinatra<>and
> Jekyll <>. It was really
> productive, but -- at the end of the day, a reporter was there asking
> everybody questions about their projects.
>  When he asked what Webfinger was for, I realized that the original
> easy-to-communicate killer app for Webfinger, easing universal login
> through OpenID, was<>
> dead <>. The only thing I could think to say was
> "Remember OpenID? Before it died? Well, this is a piece of the puzzle to
> putting something like that back together again."
>  That didn't feel like a very impressive answer. So, now that OpenID is
> dead, what's the one line explanation for why Webfinger is important?
> What's the path forward to making Webfinger something people are
> incentivized to support?
>  Should we be pushing really hard to resuscitate OpenID via OpenID
> Connect? Do we just need to wait for internal lobbying inside of
> Google/Microsoft/Twitter/etc to pay off in some announcement? I know
> Webfinger supports more than email lookup -- is there some particular
> killer app people were envisioning when they lobbied for that feature?
>  I'm so happy there's finally an RFC, after so many years. I recognize
> how much work was put in to make that happen, and this shouldn't be taken
> as a criticism of anyone. I just want to know what others see for the
> future of Webfinger, and what I should do next.
>  -- Eric
>  --
> | @konklone <>
> _______________________________________________
> webfinger mailing listwebfinger@ietf.org
> _______________________________________________
> webfinger mailing list

-- | @konklone <>