On 2009-03-02 10:21, Dave CROCKER wrote:
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Dave,
On 2009-03-02 07:17, Dave CROCKER wrote:
...
What is particularly interesting to me, about this line of comment, is
not whether the relevant IETF-based technologies are superior or whether
Can you point me to the IETF WG(s) that are considering identity
management as a whole? I know there was the DIX BOF at IETF 65,
but since then??
Brian,
A fair question, but Identity "management" seems to have varied
meanings, depending on who is discussing it. There is, for example, a
good argument that any authentication activity is part of, or involves,
ID mgmt. So OpenPGP, S/MIME, DKIM, TLS and the emerging OAuth
acitivities come to mind.
So does DNS...
But when it's an area that *is* relevant to the Internet,
but that the IETF appears to have passed on, it's less clear
what the discussion would achieve.
passed on? huh? when did we do that?
Well, what I mean is that the IETF did what it normally does
(and this is not a criticism): chose to work on various bits
and pieces (as you list above) but *not* to work on a general
framework. Whatever people think about the Liberty Alliance, or
efforts like Shibboleth, they are trying to look at the big picture.
This assertion is a couple of years out of date, but people I knew
who are experts in the identity management area never thought that
the IETF was relevant except as a source of atomic components.
Brian
In any event, if it something ISOC considers worth making a strategic
relationship about, and it is likely to entail Internet technical
standards, then it would be strange to have the IETF skip dealing with it.
An easy example is exactly the sort of involvement being implied by the
current thread: When ISOC is choosing to take a strategic action,
should it seek public discussion within the IETF?
...
So I'd say it's clear what should happen: ISOC should ask the IAB, and
the IAB, in the spirit of openness, should raise discussion within the
IETF.
sounds like a plan.
Let me stress again that I wasn't offering criticism. I think that the
IETF has historically been the source of initiatives that it
participates in, and that this appears to be something different. That
makes it worth exploring a bit.
d/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf