dick at sxip.com
Mon Jan 9 21:40:28 UTC 2006
On 9-Jan-06, at 12:04 PM, S. Alexander Jacobson wrote:
>> if (3), then why not just document <link rel= ...> tags and each
>> protocol can work on solving all the issues in their own way?
> On reflection, I don't get the use of <link rel...> tags and
> homepage URLs.
It is for protocol discovery, not user identity. I think everyone on
this list is aligned that URLs are a good way to identify a user that
does not disclose more info than you would want disclosed.
> Email addresses already the de-facto Internet standard for user
> identity. We should be enhancing use of this namespace rather than
> creating new ones. Here is the obvious protocol for authenticating
> email addresses:
A view I have is that URIs are identities. So mailto:dick at sxip.com is
> 1. User supplies email address to consumer site.
> 2. Consumer site looks up UserId DNS record for email address
> domain name.
> (Note: I don't think UserId records need to have priorities
> like MX
> 3. If UserId record is absent/broken, send email with a
> validation URL.
> If UserID DNS record is present, consumer site posts to
> POST UserID_URL
> content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
> email=user at domain&is_email=is_email_url
> 201 CREATED
> Location: redirectURL
> 4. Consumer redirects user to redirectURL and grants authentication
> if it receives a GET is_email_url
> * All internet users have email addresses. Users without email
> addresses can safely be ignored.
not necessarily true.
Few people have lots of email addresses. 1:1 relying party <-> user
identity mapping is key to conform with Kim's laws of identity
(unidirectional) Something that is hard to do with OpenID or LID --
and really hard to do with email as proposed below
> * Email addresses designed to be easy to type (much less
> punctuation!). URLs are really verbose for manually entered data.
> (If you don't require http:// or https:// in URLs then you open up
> substantial ambiguity!)
> * Email addresses imply both identity and authentication. Homepages
> imply nothing. Expecting most users to understand the difference
> between homepages with appropriate link tags and homepages that
> don't seems lik a tall order.
The ability to edit a homepage implies ownership and control.
> * Most users do NOT currently have homepages. Users without homepages
> need to be supported. Absent URI or email addresses, there is no
> global namespace. Per site identity namespace fragmentation limits
The Homesite managing a users identity can easily generate a page for
> * DNS is designed for exactly this sort of directory lookup. Multiple
> link tags in ill-formed HTML create interesting opportunities for
> ambiguity. Moreover, requiring that homepages be HTML is just poor
> design. We should not prohibit flash homepages or pages with
> some other XML content-type styled by XSLT to generate HTML.
I think you are mixing protocol discovery up with identity.
Also, most of us are thinking more of blogs, then homepages ...
More information about the yadis