Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [decentralization] Sun alliance targets Microsoft's Passport

Expand Messages
  • Brian Behlendorf
    ... Details are still being determined. All the groups mentioned in that announcement agreed to was an expression of interest in working together on common
    Message 1 of 6 , Sep 26, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Jonathan Berry wrote:
      > Can someone fill me in on whether Sun and Co. are just an alternative to a
      > megalith or a legit OS group? If this is offlist for here please contact me
      > by e-mail below.

      Details are still being determined. All the groups mentioned in that
      announcement agreed to was an expression of interest in working together
      on common specs and common code.

      Brian
    • Lucas Gonze
      This is 100% pure FUD. No announced members have a decent sized user identity database. AOL is Sun s traditional ally and it isn t a member. Yahoo, ICQ, and
      Message 2 of 6 , Sep 26, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        This is 100% pure FUD.

        No announced members have a decent sized user identity database. AOL is Sun's
        traditional ally and it isn't a member. Yahoo, ICQ, and Jabber aren't members.
        IBM isn't a member. Verisign and eBay are members but have deals to support
        Passport also.

        There is no technology announced at all -- absurd!

        Would it be possible, every once in a while, to do something aside from zigging
        to the enemy's zag? Would it be possible to encourage the growth of identity
        services as long as competition was open? Would it be even vaguely possible to
        put the good of users before the thrill of competition?
      • Michael Herman (Parallelspace)
        Strategic Vaporware ... From: Lucas Gonze [mailto:lucas@worldos.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 5:12 PM To: decentralization@yahoogroups.com Subject:
        Message 3 of 6 , Sep 26, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Strategic Vaporware

          -----Original Message-----
          From: Lucas Gonze [mailto:lucas@...]
          Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 5:12 PM
          To: decentralization@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: RE: [decentralization] Sun alliance targets Microsoft's
          Passport


          This is 100% pure FUD.

          No announced members have a decent sized user identity database. AOL is
          Sun's traditional ally and it isn't a member. Yahoo, ICQ, and Jabber
          aren't members. IBM isn't a member. Verisign and eBay are members but
          have deals to support Passport also.

          There is no technology announced at all -- absurd!

          Would it be possible, every once in a while, to do something aside from
          zigging to the enemy's zag? Would it be possible to encourage the
          growth of identity services as long as competition was open? Would it
          be even vaguely possible to put the good of users before the thrill of
          competition?



          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          decentralization-unsubscribe@egroups.com



          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        • Lucas Gonze
          Here is a possible settlement between Liberty Alliance Project and MS: * Kerberos, as with Passport * but standard kerberos, not the proprietary un-kerberos *
          Message 4 of 6 , Sep 26, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            Here is a possible settlement between Liberty Alliance Project and MS:
            * Kerberos, as with Passport
            * but standard kerberos, not the proprietary un-kerberos
            * who can federate is completely open. Any ISP can do it, any paranoid
            individual with an always-on connection can do it. (I don't know if that is
            technically feasible) (*1)
            * Passport is the model for interactions, but the standard is declared free of
            patent protections by MS. (...just like w/ all w3c projects, right?)

            To LAP members, let me point out that MS has the users and may well atomize the
            opposition -- you should be willing to compromise. To MS, let me point out that
            you are working very hard to bring in third party developers, and these are the
            third party developers; AOL is likely to join LAP (if it can tear itself away
            from its own navel); and Yahoo is not married to you via IMUnified. Both
            factions have an incentive to work together.

            I feel that MS' glommed onto Kerberos prematurely, and wouldn't have used it if
            they had anticipated need for broad federation. On a technical level it may not
            be up to the huge task that Passport hopes to solve, but so what. Passport is
            here now and it's time to get cracking on running code.

            - Lucas

            *1: per http://www.pasta.cs.uit.no/thesis/html/ronnya/node39.html
            "this requires O(N2)key exchanges to interconnect N domains. Version 5 of
            Kerberos improves this by establishing a hierarchy of domains where any domain
            may inter-operate with any other domain in the hierarchy. This arrangement
            reduces the number of key exchanges to O(logN). " ---- that's still
            potentially a hell of a lot of key exchanges.
          • Wesley Felter
            ... This article tells it a little differently: http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/01/09/26/010926hnpassriup.xml ... Yes, quite a shame. Wesley Felter -
            Message 5 of 6 , Sep 26, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Lucas Gonze wrote:

              > This is 100% pure FUD.
              >
              > No announced members have a decent sized user identity database. AOL is Sun's
              > traditional ally and it isn't a member. Yahoo, ICQ, and Jabber aren't members.
              > IBM isn't a member. Verisign and eBay are members but have deals to support
              > Passport also.

              This article tells it a little differently:

              http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/01/09/26/010926hnpassriup.xml

              > There is no technology announced at all -- absurd!

              Yes, quite a shame.

              Wesley Felter - wesley@... - http://felter.org/wesley/
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.