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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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.