From konklone@gmail.com Fri Nov 1 07:59:41 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B20E311E8212 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 07:59:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: 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 mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dWdZ7rPAIICv for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 07:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ee0-x22d.google.com (mail-ee0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c00::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA85D11E8395 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 07:59:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ee0-f45.google.com with SMTP id e50so2055682eek.4 for ; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 07:59:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=2mYO7JS2v1RX8cepMYuIcO/7CmOwDDDUAz2YDSgnd6E=; b=rP6eeWw2LIL0rH7V4oVLSrRRPidKJbNUAgVjxi1V7XLNQUNRwNPouWcjBkE2bb0a8d bKSbVVlhngCt0nKSDypPMwwp7ULIDMuuO9c/k/c8yskDxCKUGoKCz1yajQhy2ZE4cr9O QFFg4Ocd0GKIzLXnYo9aaqXFIw6X54xxfEHu+lWkwQkml1ccythjkGa1/V5/MwovITrT vpZQIC87Qwafg3PaKTmX/PowhnLx5cpvsWmT/kPa821Q+wMbXsNwDLJYtypHytEKz22I Oa/87gDvwbxd08FK9P/GMFY06IuHwEY/Lnv/Y/1/W17tPajzpyis6/QUnz9dzfzhKrqy UWtQ== X-Received: by 10.14.175.199 with SMTP id z47mr223401eel.130.1383317974899; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 07:59:34 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: konklone@gmail.com Received: by 10.223.10.137 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 07:58:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <525D9646.7010306@packetizer.com> From: Eric Mill Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 10:58:54 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: BqonvupXxT0JPJCqtXsNZZcFmS8 Message-ID: To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b62277c8162b104ea1ed097 Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" , webfinger@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [webfinger] Vision for Webfinger - what are we doing? X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org 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: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 14:59:41 -0000 --047d7b62277c8162b104ea1ed097 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I channeled this into a blog post, if anyone's interested: https://konklone.com/post/webfinger-gets-a-final-chance I imagine it's going to rankle some people who disagree with my prognosis that some things are dead, but it's how it feels from here. Webfinger needs rapid experimentation, high profile adoption, and the energy of the rest of the open web community. On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill wrote: > 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 >> forums.packetizer.com, 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 Sinatraand >> 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.com | @konklone >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webfinger mailing listwebfinger@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webfinger mailing list >> webfinger@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >> >> > > > -- > konklone.com | @konklone > -- konklone.com | @konklone --047d7b62277c8162b104ea1ed097 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I channeled this into a blog post, if anyone's interes= ted:


I imagine it's going to rankle some people wh= o disagree with my prognosis that some things are dead, but it's how it= feels from here. Webfinger needs rapid experimentation, high profile adopt= ion, and the energy of the rest of the open web community.


On Wed, Oct 1= 6, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill <eric@konklone.com> wrote:
This is all helpful to hear= , and I hope these all come to fruition, especially OpenID Connect. I'l= l 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 compani= es make a meaningful gesture, too. Giving Google's outdated Webfinger endpoi= nt=A0for Gmail a big update would be a great start.

O= n Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
Eric,

OpenID is not entirely dead, yet.=A0 I still run my own OpenID OP server and use it to log into some sites.=A0 I still allow OpenID logins on fo= rums.packetizer.com, too.=A0 It's still in use, but the large sites just didn't have enough users using it, so they axed it.=A0 On its heels, though, is now OpenID Connect and it will use WebFinger for discovery.=A0 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=A0today, 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.=A0

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, no= w 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

-- 


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<=
/a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger




--



--
--047d7b62277c8162b104ea1ed097-- From bobwyman@gmail.com Fri Nov 1 08:13:46 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 408C511E8162 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:13:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 16bW2BPYty4Y for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:13:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x236.google.com (mail-wi0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C37BB11E817D for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:13:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id ez12so1219175wid.3 for ; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 08:13:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=FSOG1PhQUQ1jwBzAgQr/+2oY+eOdmSzOmTzXCC6MbQo=; b=sssWhEB3dFj7HZ9BVq4b2kFt7LieVJ/gnZhDD9Ag6Pm8eOFHC1q53JaCiuOeJ3SgV2 rtlbhVupxHw8GMtFNBHOhALXE2/9cI+80W7z+tyPlA2sFl1Z17I1eBSM016b158mVs5y +J40Mm/VawOy4C4Qh7iCVRjzVWl+/jerhu/pbRBmZWey3p6v73mtujrZ6oNr9upfUQSO NOxkXFqoWNQNtDL/htpAUYkvibzPz8UJPpakHRIdcdU/0g4gf7uJOlYyi/HuXLSqBdlx KhIexmly5hwIdcp05PlRhCasppupJAApaAX3TTl+UNSN4CTNk5oEADTfQAA/bFL94wcI jdOw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.8.137 with SMTP id r9mr23377wja.78.1383318820852; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 08:13:40 -0700 (PDT) Sender: bobwyman@gmail.com Received: by 10.194.190.166 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:13:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <525D9646.7010306@packetizer.com> Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:13:40 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ZVkRifnKo5WUXNgkoBj-nwK6O-8 Message-ID: From: Bob Wyman To: Eric Mill Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d2532ed9da104ea1f02af Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , WebFinger List , "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Vision for Webfinger - what are we doing? X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org 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: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 15:13:46 -0000 --047d7b5d2532ed9da104ea1f02af Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Eric, you wrote: "Webfinger is a standard way to attach information to an email address. " This isn't really accurate. It would be much better written as: "Webfinger provides a standard mechanism that can be used to associate data with an email address." it is essential to understand that Webfinger is useful for much more than the single use-case you discuss. bob wyman On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Eric Mill wrote: > I channeled this into a blog post, if anyone's interested: > > https://konklone.com/post/webfinger-gets-a-final-chance > > I imagine it's going to rankle some people who disagree with my prognosis > that some things are dead, but it's how it feels from here. Webfinger needs > rapid experimentation, high profile adoption, and the energy of the rest of > the open web community. > > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill wrote: > >> 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 >>> forums.packetizer.com, 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 Sinatraand >>> 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.com | @konklone >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> webfinger mailing listwebfinger@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> webfinger mailing list >>> webfinger@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> konklone.com | @konklone >> > > > > -- > konklone.com | @konklone > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > --047d7b5d2532ed9da104ea1f02af Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Eric, you wrote:
"Webfinger is a standard way to attach information to an emai= l address.=A0&q= uot;

This isn't really accurate. It would be much better= written as: "Webfinger provides a standard mechanism that can be used= to associate data with an email address."

it is essential to understand that Webfinger is useful for much more than t= he single use-case you discuss.

bob wyman



On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Eric Mill <eric@konklone.com> wrote:
I channeled this into a blog post, if anyone's interes= ted:


I imagine it's going to rankle some people wh= o disagree with my prognosis that some things are dead, but it's how it= feels from here. Webfinger needs rapid experimentation, high profile adopt= ion, and the energy of the rest of the open web community.


On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill <= ;eric@konklone.com> wrote:
This is all helpful to hear= , and I hope these all come to fruition, especially OpenID Connect. I'l= l take a stab at setting up my own OpenID Connect service on my domain and = see how it feels.

O= n Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
Eric,

OpenID is not entirely dead, yet.=A0 I still run my own OpenID OP server and use it to log into some sites.=A0 I still allow OpenID logins on fo= rums.packetizer.com, too.=A0 It's still in use, but the large sites just didn't have enough users using it, so they axed it.=A0 On its heels, though, is now OpenID Connect and it will use WebFinger for discovery.=A0 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=A0today, 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.=A0

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, no= w 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

-- 


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<=
/a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger




--



--

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


--047d7b5d2532ed9da104ea1f02af-- From melvincarvalho@gmail.com Fri Nov 1 08:14:34 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42AD011E8395 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:14:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.544 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.544 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.055, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RmRg3XZzhmuj for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:14:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x235.google.com (mail-lb0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 202A311E8393 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:14:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f181.google.com with SMTP id x18so3613365lbi.12 for ; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 08:14:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=UN64T6FOvmjJ1XjpgPkt1ipiLYdqF4+1wLZjprLFbEI=; b=Y9JwJPzcMB1vOkrY+ryHqTXFjc68gGb0x84ZONP6xPHZ000Y39t5T5Afm2LZ7RyJiO zYlgAfIkHjnOUIDKExjEl+ZwaGUleHpAk9H/KrASp8vueBpkY4lyBclRyji2gNgbmHKG YiIHH7A0/HWI3fI6IXsKQDLtlTmjWQqTJMFm59ZOP8HYMYdnubKLkHsxx9yChi6XMfB2 kiTu9G1Ygyme97BfixFdtCC4iXhXOJBUn1ANwL0zMepSU2uJ2lq4TwPokiZGGjfDJZQy vBVm00M5wYe62y4kwhz6I1hnP7hYy7gwJ1h53+ej7eudE45rXQ2SPT5EPf8gkqbaDQfq SfCA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.228.130 with SMTP id si2mr2333741lac.32.1383318870017; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 08:14:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.159.233 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:14:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <525D9646.7010306@packetizer.com> Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 16:14:29 +0100 Message-ID: From: Melvin Carvalho To: Eric Mill Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1133f3d0dbced204ea1f055b Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , "webfinger@googlegroups.com" , "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Vision for Webfinger - what are we doing? X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org 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: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 15:14:34 -0000 --001a1133f3d0dbced204ea1f055b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 1 November 2013 15:58, Eric Mill wrote: > I channeled this into a blog post, if anyone's interested: > > https://konklone.com/post/webfinger-gets-a-final-chance > Nice post. It's actually worth rereading Eran's post on this topic. It's great that eran talks about http range 14. +1 that your record has https +1 that you set the mime type I personally would *not* use the webfinger.net link relations, but reuse existing predicates such as FOAF, which passes W3C validation (e.g. vapour). But you are free to choose what you prefer. IMHO, decentralization didnt happen, we live in a more centralized web than ever. Many people including Chris Messina advocated the host your own identity pattern, but slowly but surely, the concept was put more and more to the side. At least openid in theory still allows it, even if the practice is very different. Persona does not allow it at all. You seem to suggest that webfinger is about getting information about email addresses, although that was the original idea, but it's not now. It's about accounts at hosts, which is a subtle difference. SWD was about email addresses. Overall I find myself agreeing with most of what you say :) > > I imagine it's going to rankle some people who disagree with my prognosis > that some things are dead, but it's how it feels from here. Webfinger needs > rapid experimentation, high profile adoption, and the energy of the rest of > the open web community. > > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill wrote: > >> 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 >>> forums.packetizer.com, 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 Sinatraand >>> 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.com | @konklone >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> webfinger mailing listwebfinger@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> webfinger mailing list >>> webfinger@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> konklone.com | @konklone >> > > > > -- > konklone.com | @konklone > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > --001a1133f3d0dbced204ea1f055b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 1 November 2013 15:58, Eric Mill <eric@konklone.com> wrote:
I channeled this into a blo= g post, if anyone's interested:


Nice post.=A0 It's actuall= y worth rereading Eran's post on this topic.=A0 It's great that era= n talks about http range 14.

+1 that your record has http= s

+1 that you set the mime type

I personally= would *not* use the webfinger.net lin= k relations, but reuse existing predicates such as FOAF, which passes W3C v= alidation (e.g. vapour).=A0 But you are free to choose what you prefer.

IMHO, decentralization didnt happen, we live in a more centr= alized web than ever.=A0 Many people including Chris Messina advocated the = host your own identity pattern, but slowly but surely, the concept was put = more and more to the side.=A0 At least openid in theory still allows it, ev= en if the practice is very different.=A0 Persona does not allow it at all.<= br>
You seem to suggest that webfinger is about getting informat= ion about email addresses, although that was the original idea, but it'= s not now.=A0 It's about accounts at hosts, which is a subtle differenc= e.=A0 SWD was about email addresses.

Overall I find myself agreeing with most of what you say :)<= br>
=A0

I imagine it's going to rankle some people wh= o disagree with my prognosis that some things are dead, but it's how it= feels from here. Webfinger needs rapid experimentation, high profile adopt= ion, and the energy of the rest of the open web community.


On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill <= ;eric@konklone.com> wrote:
This is all helpful to hear= , and I hope these all come to fruition, especially OpenID Connect. I'l= l take a stab at setting up my own OpenID Connect service on my domain and = see how it feels.

O= n Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
Eric,

OpenID is not entirely dead, yet.=A0 I still run my own OpenID OP server and use it to log into some sites.=A0 I still allow OpenID logins on fo= rums.packetizer.com, too.=A0 It's still in use, but the large sites just didn't have enough users using it, so they axed it.=A0 On its heels, though, is now OpenID Connect and it will use WebFinger for discovery.=A0 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=A0today, 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.=A0

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, no= w 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

-- 


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<=
/a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger




--



--

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


--001a1133f3d0dbced204ea1f055b-- From konklone@gmail.com Fri Nov 1 08:50:04 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55A1C11E815F for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:50:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.477 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.477 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_BACKHAIR_42=1, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iuPZGcn4tgSB for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:50:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ea0-x232.google.com (mail-ea0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c01::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B88D211E81C6 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:50:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ea0-f178.google.com with SMTP id a15so2157638eae.9 for ; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 08:49:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=WBVXDYJXsl6DtVTZWppSL4vOOQkJQNDGXxZXGPPCZ7I=; b=Yof/wln5r9NT1AQ5kCME5VLVGFNjbNSG/PPzcoKqFQjEjJX8VNljkSs4tUecGyrqr9 MPa2p4qoiJlOaZO+8L1wzotGHID1kmS5bv1d4+M+/PYdLfpGymZdH0e1jmI7lIqY7Ogz ES3+oYofQkMEZtLVsijY1+1V8pjggHNFERZbwIs1lUw56nl+lr5v3dcs94XVcuwItfdp M2wkeGLcuY3+3Ud1dzrwHqZog00nscGSF7jFNS8y+CcYDgqDmfr9RcpyztFBS5t6229O PAWGSN1T0Ho6Nz9hvqWag22qx/untn0lvdddKyF4jT+9HJIVDsxVJPGdXb5y1Nr6H4hF WbXg== X-Received: by 10.14.103.133 with SMTP id f5mr3930886eeg.48.1383320999731; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 08:49:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: konklone@gmail.com Received: by 10.223.10.137 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:49:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <525D9646.7010306@packetizer.com> From: Eric Mill Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:49:19 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: muQOshJhNV8-n8o8oLyp_b6yFoI Message-ID: To: webfinger@googlegroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2833accaaad04ea1f846b Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Vision for Webfinger - what are we doing? X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org 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: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 15:50:04 -0000 --001a11c2833accaaad04ea1f846b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I know I gloss over the non-email uses of Webfinger. It's just very far from my original understanding of WF, and I don't know any uses out there of WF for non-email URIs to mention. FWIW, I was more precise in the definition I contributed to the front page of webfinger.net : "A way to attach information to an email address, or other online resource." About the link relations (and maybe this should be a separate thread), when I was making sinatra-webfinger, I realized it was useful to start a little mapping fileof keywords to best-practice URNs. That way, my configuration was just "name: 'Eric Mill'", etc. Maybe it's worth factoring this out to its own tiny repo, and soliciting contributions? I think in practice, most admin and user interaction with Webfinger property names and link rel's should be through common names, not literally pasting in whole URNs. I honestly can't be bothered to remember them, or choose between them. -- Eric On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: > > > > On 1 November 2013 15:58, Eric Mill wrote: > >> I channeled this into a blog post, if anyone's interested: >> >> https://konklone.com/post/webfinger-gets-a-final-chance >> > > Nice post. It's actually worth rereading Eran's post on this topic. It's > great that eran talks about http range 14. > > +1 that your record has https > > +1 that you set the mime type > > I personally would *not* use the webfinger.net link relations, but reuse > existing predicates such as FOAF, which passes W3C validation (e.g. > vapour). But you are free to choose what you prefer. > > IMHO, decentralization didnt happen, we live in a more centralized web > than ever. Many people including Chris Messina advocated the host your own > identity pattern, but slowly but surely, the concept was put more and more > to the side. At least openid in theory still allows it, even if the > practice is very different. Persona does not allow it at all. > > You seem to suggest that webfinger is about getting information about > email addresses, although that was the original idea, but it's not now. > It's about accounts at hosts, which is a subtle difference. SWD was about > email addresses. > > Overall I find myself agreeing with most of what you say :) > > >> >> I imagine it's going to rankle some people who disagree with my prognosis >> that some things are dead, but it's how it feels from here. Webfinger needs >> rapid experimentation, high profile adoption, and the energy of the rest of >> the open web community. >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill wrote: >> >>> 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 >>>> forums.packetizer.com, 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 Sinatraand >>>> 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.com | @konklone >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> webfinger mailing listwebfinger@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> webfinger mailing list >>>> webfinger@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> konklone.com | @konklone >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> konklone.com | @konklone >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webfinger mailing list >> webfinger@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >> >> > -- > > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "WebFinger" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to webfinger+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- konklone.com | @konklone --001a11c2833accaaad04ea1f846b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I know I gloss over the non-email uses of Webfinger. = It's just very far from my original understanding of WF, and I don'= t know any uses out there of WF for non-email URIs to mention. FWIW, I was = more precise in the definition I contributed to the front page of webfinger.net: "A way to attach information to an = email address, or other online resource."

About the link relations (and maybe this should be a separat= e thread), when I was making sinatra-webfinger, I realized it was useful to= start a little mapping file of keywords to best-practice URNs= . That way, my configuration was just "name: 'Eric Mill'"= , etc.

Maybe it's worth factoring this out to its own tiny= repo, and soliciting contributions? I think in practice, most admin and us= er interaction with Webfinger property names and link rel's should be t= hrough common names, not literally pasting in whole URNs. I honestly can= 9;t be bothered to remember them, or choose between them.

-- Eric

On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Melvin Car= valho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:



On 1 November 2013= 15:58, Eric Mill <eric@konklone.com> wrote:
I channeled this into a blo= g post, if anyone's interested:


Nice post.=A0 It's a= ctually worth rereading Eran's post on this topic.=A0 It's great th= at eran talks about http range 14.

+1 that your record ha= s https

+1 that you set the mime type

I personally= would *not* use the web= finger.net link relations, but reuse existing predicates such as FOAF, = which passes W3C validation (e.g. vapour).=A0 But you are free to choose wh= at you prefer.

IMHO, decentralization didnt happen, we live in a more centr= alized web than ever.=A0 Many people including Chris Messina advocated the = host your own identity pattern, but slowly but surely, the concept was put = more and more to the side.=A0 At least openid in theory still allows it, ev= en if the practice is very different.=A0 Persona does not allow it at all.<= br>
You seem to suggest that webfinger is about getting informat= ion about email addresses, although that was the original idea, but it'= s not now.=A0 It's about accounts at hosts, which is a subtle differenc= e.=A0 SWD was about email addresses.

Overall I find myself agreeing with most of what you say :)<= br>
=A0

I imagine it's going to rankle some people wh= o disagree with my prognosis that some things are dead, but it's how it= feels from here. Webfinger needs rapid experimentation, high profile adopt= ion, and the energy of the rest of the open web community.


On = Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill <eric@konklone.com>= wrote:
This is all helpful to hear= , and I hope these all come to fruition, especially OpenID Connect. I'l= l 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 compani= es make a meaningful gesture, too. Giving Google's outdated Webfinger endpoi= nt=A0for Gmail a big update would be a great start.

O= n Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
Eric,

OpenID is not entirely dead, yet.=A0 I still run my own OpenID OP server and use it to log into some sites.=A0 I still allow OpenID logins on fo= rums.packetizer.com, too.=A0 It's still in use, but the large sites just didn't have enough users using it, so they axed it.=A0 On its heels, though, is now OpenID Connect and it will use WebFinger for discovery.=A0 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=A0today, 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.=A0

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, no= w 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

-- 


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<=
/a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger




--



<= font color=3D"#888888">--

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


--
=A0

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;WebFinger" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to webfinger+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--
= --001a11c2833accaaad04ea1f846b-- From bobwyman@gmail.com Fri Nov 1 11:08:39 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4F8A21E80B2 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:08:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.623 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.623 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.600, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FM_IS_IT_OUR_ACCOUNT=4.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_BACKHAIR_42=1, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZUAVbBnSbyhY for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:08:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-we0-x22e.google.com (mail-we0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3539C11E8177 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:08:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-we0-f174.google.com with SMTP id u56so4244085wes.5 for ; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 11:08:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=xqUwe2QBDuhX5n1fPQnOUl+qAem7r/MEhPHrEGfyZ5I=; b=fAGSRovrG0MINF3L19zJirXoue6PJSzY5HXLTcgcf3I3aO7ouKeuCe4gxZ2HD5Ler1 mBN4kWJ3ZlZ6WlKrB25dW18nkyvleN+X6nA3wiAJxV6aU+T0TCuyUxoTVnFFpNQRLMAN GQNbwQhPr21hO96jnufUNZuRD2jd70cSUgfYHM38JVah4uFYnmrrIO+RjqayA+Uz1bWC FtewMnRd/ZN25ze/HP5Zt1N+7/0DcC4O4+gvRmWRginXL2xkxSWT6G9yTrBICnAlPuRU hauOrxV1QhIL81+6pbDRQFQsjk7kXhMkC0vsDOxxu7H1eiEyMVGsMst4pRPxAVHoezpa mNSA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.83.228 with SMTP id t4mr3169620wiy.12.1383329315669; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 11:08:35 -0700 (PDT) Sender: bobwyman@gmail.com Received: by 10.194.190.166 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:08:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <525D9646.7010306@packetizer.com> Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 14:08:35 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 368FyKgBQbRGbeEJXjPHuua5RRI Message-ID: From: Bob Wyman To: Eric Mill Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04428ba077d09d04ea217414 Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , WebFinger List , "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Vision for Webfinger - what are we doing? X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org 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: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 18:08:40 -0000 --f46d04428ba077d09d04ea217414 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Eric Mill wrote: > I know I gloss over the non-email uses of Webfinger. It's just very far > from my original understanding of WF, and I don't know any uses out there > of WF for non-email URIs to mention. > Imagine that you were running a service like Twitter that has accounts but doesn't offer email service. In this case, you might use an acct: URI to allow data to be associated with names of your accounts. Imagine that you had a web page that allowed users to do some kind of a search or perform some function upon filling out a form. But, you also offered an API so that folk could write programs to accomplish the same function without parsing HTML, etc. -- if only they knew the API protocol or had a WSDL-like document describing it. In that case, you could use WebFinger to return a resource that described or pointed to the API that should be used with the page. (i.e. this would be like a simple, distributed version of UDDI ...) etc. the uses are endless... > FWIW, I was more precise in the definition I contributedto the front > page of webfinger.net : "A way to attach > information to an email address, or other online resource." > > About the link relations (and maybe this should be a separate thread), > when I was making sinatra-webfinger, I realized it was useful to start a little > mapping fileof keywords to best-practice URNs. That way, my configuration was just > "name: 'Eric Mill'", etc. > > Maybe it's worth factoring this out to its own tiny repo, and soliciting > contributions? I think in practice, most admin and user interaction with > Webfinger property names and link rel's should be through common names, not > literally pasting in whole URNs. I honestly can't be bothered to remember > them, or choose between them. > > -- Eric > > > On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho > wrote: > >> >> >> >> On 1 November 2013 15:58, Eric Mill wrote: >> >>> I channeled this into a blog post, if anyone's interested: >>> >>> https://konklone.com/post/webfinger-gets-a-final-chance >>> >> >> Nice post. It's actually worth rereading Eran's post on this topic. >> It's great that eran talks about http range 14. >> >> +1 that your record has https >> >> +1 that you set the mime type >> >> I personally would *not* use the webfinger.net link relations, but reuse >> existing predicates such as FOAF, which passes W3C validation (e.g. >> vapour). But you are free to choose what you prefer. >> >> IMHO, decentralization didnt happen, we live in a more centralized web >> than ever. Many people including Chris Messina advocated the host your own >> identity pattern, but slowly but surely, the concept was put more and more >> to the side. At least openid in theory still allows it, even if the >> practice is very different. Persona does not allow it at all. >> >> You seem to suggest that webfinger is about getting information about >> email addresses, although that was the original idea, but it's not now. >> It's about accounts at hosts, which is a subtle difference. SWD was about >> email addresses. >> >> Overall I find myself agreeing with most of what you say :) >> >> >>> >>> I imagine it's going to rankle some people who disagree with my >>> prognosis that some things are dead, but it's how it feels from here. >>> Webfinger needs rapid experimentation, high profile adoption, and the >>> energy of the rest of the open web community. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill wrote: >>> >>>> 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 >>>>> forums.packetizer.com, 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 Sinatraand >>>>> 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.com | @konklone >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> webfinger mailing listwebfinger@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> webfinger mailing list >>>>> webfinger@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> konklone.com | @konklone >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> konklone.com | @konklone >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> webfinger mailing list >>> webfinger@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>> >>> >> -- >> >> >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "WebFinger" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to webfinger+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> > > > > -- > konklone.com | @konklone > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > --f46d04428ba077d09d04ea217414 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Eric Mill <eric@konklone.com&= gt; wrote:
I know I gloss over th= e non-email uses of Webfinger. It's just very far from my original unde= rstanding of WF, and I don't know any uses out there of WF for non-emai= l URIs to mention.

Imagine that you were running a serv= ice like Twitter that has accounts but doesn't offer email service. In = this case, you might use an acct: URI to allow data to be associated with n= ames of your accounts.=A0

Imagine that you had a web page that allowed users to d= o some kind of a search or perform some function upon filling out a form. B= ut, you also offered an API so that folk could write programs to accomplish= the same function without parsing HTML, etc. -- if only they knew the API = protocol or had a WSDL-like document describing it. In that case, you c= ould use WebFinger to return a resource that described or pointed to the AP= I that should be used with the page. (i.e. this would be like a simple, dis= tributed version of UDDI...)

etc. the uses are endless...

= =A0
FWIW, I = was more precise in the definition I contributed to the front page of webfinger.net: = "A way to attach information to an email address, or other online reso= urce."

About the link relations (and maybe this should be a separat= e thread), when I was making sinatra-webfinger, I realized it was useful to= start a little mapping file of keywords to = best-practice URNs. That way, my configuration was just "name: 'Er= ic Mill'", etc.

Maybe it's worth factoring this out to its own tiny= repo, and soliciting contributions? I think in practice, most admin and us= er interaction with Webfinger property names and link rel's should be t= hrough common names, not literally pasting in whole URNs. I honestly can= 9;t be bothered to remember them, or choose between them.

-- Eric


On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 = at 11:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:



On 1 November 2013 15:58, Eric = Mill <eric@konklone.com> wrote:
I channeled this into a blo= g post, if anyone's interested:


Nice post.=A0 It's a= ctually worth rereading Eran's post on this topic.=A0 It's great th= at eran talks about http range 14.

+1 that your record ha= s https

+1 that you set the mime type

I personally= would *not* use the web= finger.net link relations, but reuse existing predicates such as FOAF, = which passes W3C validation (e.g. vapour).=A0 But you are free to choose wh= at you prefer.

IMHO, decentralization didnt happen, we live in a more centr= alized web than ever.=A0 Many people including Chris Messina advocated the = host your own identity pattern, but slowly but surely, the concept was put = more and more to the side.=A0 At least openid in theory still allows it, ev= en if the practice is very different.=A0 Persona does not allow it at all.<= br>
You seem to suggest that webfinger is about getting informat= ion about email addresses, although that was the original idea, but it'= s not now.=A0 It's about accounts at hosts, which is a subtle differenc= e.=A0 SWD was about email addresses.

Overall I find myself agreeing with most of what you say :)<= br>
=A0

I imagine it's going to rankle some people wh= o disagree with my prognosis that some things are dead, but it's how it= feels from here. Webfinger needs rapid experimentation, high profile adopt= ion, and the energy of the rest of the open web community.


On = Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill <eric@konklone.com>= wrote:
This is all helpful to hear= , and I hope these all come to fruition, especially OpenID Connect. I'l= l 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 compani= es make a meaningful gesture, too. Giving Google's outdated Webfinger endpoi= nt=A0for Gmail a big update would be a great start.

O= n Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
Eric,

OpenID is not entirely dead, yet.=A0 I still run my own OpenID OP server and use it to log into some sites.=A0 I still allow OpenID logins on fo= rums.packetizer.com, too.=A0 It's still in use, but the large sites just didn't have enough users using it, so they axed it.=A0 On its heels, though, is now OpenID Connect and it will use WebFinger for discovery.=A0 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=A0today, 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.=A0

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, no= w 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

-- 


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<=
/a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger




--



<= font color=3D"#888888">--

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


--
=A0

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;WebFinger" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to webfinger+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



<= /div>--

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


--f46d04428ba077d09d04ea217414-- From konklone@gmail.com Fri Nov 1 11:35:02 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75F7A11E8169 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:35:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.679 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.679 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.544, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FM_IS_IT_OUR_ACCOUNT=4.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_BACKHAIR_42=1, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iHqoihw1Zbwc for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ea0-x236.google.com (mail-ea0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c01::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A01411E814D for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:34:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ea0-f182.google.com with SMTP id o10so2210271eaj.41 for ; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 11:34:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=hvI3O9LuBLLuJVjGA+PTfPT7Ggq5MoMCyHT/9QJhdgw=; b=X0sIQAB2wYr40GfMds4uYSTbEWtuHjF0GJg5/aeSdfPVimUngBX/phpJJg8//6FyBo LiYytCLjp+Me1zknabo+vgnSQ1iG+GnemRgF0BnvvbJg4EyGLJ3dsL8Ifjsqikeu5Cbl OS8srkbh/xWgkVRbXG15978wUuukbBuBad+CefWHzih3/FWeTWYDmAUWRRbkvJMB2moK K5oTKlvP0FnNNlWDfMbZQFIAelXOc30sFBDkjzzQpMOLDwAKz4L43if8hbuqbB6n+SBV y4LUtEDbUUrd4o0GTfKLMeB17VJPac/p+wBUkDYWizM3c0HOO1XK6ViFMPtnui3ks+kq y6KQ== X-Received: by 10.15.54.199 with SMTP id t47mr4544478eew.46.1383330898270; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 11:34:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: konklone@gmail.com Received: by 10.223.10.137 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:34:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <525D9646.7010306@packetizer.com> From: Eric Mill Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 14:34:18 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: wYjErF_8kKaZhhCteZVoVGwjVj4 Message-ID: To: webfinger@googlegroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3d4b0cc5d0104ea21d2a6 Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Vision for Webfinger - what are we doing? X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org 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: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 18:35:02 -0000 --001a11c3d4b0cc5d0104ea21d2a6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Bob Wyman wrote: > > Imagine that you were running a service like Twitter that has accounts but > doesn't offer email service. In this case, you > might use an acct: URI to allow data to be associated with names of your > accounts. > The Twitter example makes it click for me, thank you. I added "or other account" to my post. In practice, I think that's more likely to empower "Sign in With Twitter" in a standards-oriented way than it is to empower federated identity, but that's important too. -- Eric > > Imagine that you had a web page that allowed users to do some kind of a > search or perform some function upon filling out a form. But, you also > offered an API so that folk could write programs to accomplish the same > function without parsing HTML, etc. -- if only they knew the API protocol > or had a WSDL-like > document describing it. In that case, you could use WebFinger to return a > resource that described or pointed to the API that should be used with the > page. (i.e. this would be like a simple, distributed version of UDDI > ...) > > etc. the uses are endless... > > > >> FWIW, I was more precise in the definition I contributedto the front >> page of webfinger.net : "A way to attach >> information to an email address, or other online resource." >> >> About the link relations (and maybe this should be a separate thread), >> when I was making sinatra-webfinger, I realized it was useful to start a little >> mapping fileof keywords to best-practice URNs. That way, my configuration was just >> "name: 'Eric Mill'", etc. >> >> Maybe it's worth factoring this out to its own tiny repo, and soliciting >> contributions? I think in practice, most admin and user interaction with >> Webfinger property names and link rel's should be through common names, not >> literally pasting in whole URNs. I honestly can't be bothered to remember >> them, or choose between them. >> >> -- Eric >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho < >> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 1 November 2013 15:58, Eric Mill wrote: >>> >>>> I channeled this into a blog post, if anyone's interested: >>>> >>>> https://konklone.com/post/webfinger-gets-a-final-chance >>>> >>> >>> Nice post. It's actually worth rereading Eran's post on this topic. >>> It's great that eran talks about http range 14. >>> >>> +1 that your record has https >>> >>> +1 that you set the mime type >>> >>> I personally would *not* use the webfinger.net link relations, but >>> reuse existing predicates such as FOAF, which passes W3C validation (e.g. >>> vapour). But you are free to choose what you prefer. >>> >>> IMHO, decentralization didnt happen, we live in a more centralized web >>> than ever. Many people including Chris Messina advocated the host your own >>> identity pattern, but slowly but surely, the concept was put more and more >>> to the side. At least openid in theory still allows it, even if the >>> practice is very different. Persona does not allow it at all. >>> >>> You seem to suggest that webfinger is about getting information about >>> email addresses, although that was the original idea, but it's not now. >>> It's about accounts at hosts, which is a subtle difference. SWD was about >>> email addresses. >>> >>> Overall I find myself agreeing with most of what you say :) >>> >>> >>>> >>>> I imagine it's going to rankle some people who disagree with my >>>> prognosis that some things are dead, but it's how it feels from here. >>>> Webfinger needs rapid experimentation, high profile adoption, and the >>>> energy of the rest of the open web community. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill wrote: >>>> >>>>> 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 >>>>>> forums.packetizer.com, 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 Sinatraand >>>>>> 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.com | @konklone >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> webfinger mailing listwebfinger@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> webfinger mailing list >>>>>> webfinger@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> konklone.com | @konklone >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> konklone.com | @konklone >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> webfinger mailing list >>>> webfinger@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "WebFinger" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to webfinger+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> konklone.com | @konklone >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webfinger mailing list >> webfinger@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >> >> > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "WebFinger" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to webfinger+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- konklone.com | @konklone --001a11c3d4b0cc5d0104ea21d2a6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Bob Wyman <bob@wyman.us>= ; wrote:

Imagine that you were running a ser= vice like Twitter that has accounts but doesn't offer email service. In= this case, you=A0
might use an= acct: URI to allow data to be associated with names of your accounts.=A0

The Twitter example make= s it click for me, thank you. I added "or other account" to my po= st. In practice, I think that's more likely to empower "Sign in Wi= th Twitter" in a standards-oriented way than it is to empower federate= d identity, but that's important too.

-- Eric
=A0

Imagine that you had a web page that allowed users to d= o some kind of a search or perform some function upon filling out a form. B= ut, you also offered an API so that folk could write programs to accomplish= the same function without parsing HTML, etc. -- if only they knew the API = protocol or had a WSDL-like document describing it. I= n that case, you could use WebFinger to return a resource that described or= pointed to the API that should be used with the page. (i.e. this would be = like a simple, distributed version of UDDI<= /a>...)

etc. the uses are endless...

=A0
FWIW, I was more precise in the definition I contributed to = the front page of webfi= nger.net: "A way to attach information to an email address, or oth= er online resource."

About the link relations (and maybe this should be a separat= e thread), when I was making sinatra-webfinger, I realized it was useful to= start a little mapping file of keywords to = best-practice URNs. That way, my configuration was just "name: 'Er= ic Mill'", etc.

Maybe it's worth factoring this out to its own tiny= repo, and soliciting contributions? I think in practice, most admin and us= er interaction with Webfinger property names and link rel's should be t= hrough common names, not literally pasting in whole URNs. I honestly can= 9;t be bothered to remember them, or choose between them.

-- Eric


On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:14 AM, = Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:



On 1 November 2013 15:58, Eric = Mill <eric@konklone.com> wrote:
I channeled this into a blo= g post, if anyone's interested:


Nice post.=A0 It's a= ctually worth rereading Eran's post on this topic.=A0 It's great th= at eran talks about http range 14.

+1 that your record ha= s https

+1 that you set the mime type

I personally= would *not* use the web= finger.net link relations, but reuse existing predicates such as FOAF, = which passes W3C validation (e.g. vapour).=A0 But you are free to choose wh= at you prefer.

IMHO, decentralization didnt happen, we live in a more centr= alized web than ever.=A0 Many people including Chris Messina advocated the = host your own identity pattern, but slowly but surely, the concept was put = more and more to the side.=A0 At least openid in theory still allows it, ev= en if the practice is very different.=A0 Persona does not allow it at all.<= br>
You seem to suggest that webfinger is about getting informat= ion about email addresses, although that was the original idea, but it'= s not now.=A0 It's about accounts at hosts, which is a subtle differenc= e.=A0 SWD was about email addresses.

Overall I find myself agreeing with most of what you say :)<= br>
=A0

I imagine it's going to rankle some people wh= o disagree with my prognosis that some things are dead, but it's how it= feels from here. Webfinger needs rapid experimentation, high profile adopt= ion, and the energy of the rest of the open web community.


On = Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill <eric@konklone.com>= wrote:
This is all helpful to hear= , and I hope these all come to fruition, especially OpenID Connect. I'l= l 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 compani= es make a meaningful gesture, too. Giving Google's outdated Webfinger endpoi= nt=A0for Gmail a big update would be a great start.

O= n Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
Eric,

OpenID is not entirely dead, yet.=A0 I still run my own OpenID OP server and use it to log into some sites.=A0 I still allow OpenID logins on fo= rums.packetizer.com, too.=A0 It's still in use, but the large sites just didn't have enough users using it, so they axed it.=A0 On its heels, though, is now OpenID Connect and it will use WebFinger for discovery.=A0 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=A0today, 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.=A0

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, no= w 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

-- 


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<=
/a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger




--



<= font color=3D"#888888">--

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


--
=A0

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;WebFinger" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to webfinger+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



<= /div>--

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


--
=A0
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;WebFinger" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to webfinger+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--
= --001a11c3d4b0cc5d0104ea21d2a6-- From kidehen@openlinksw.com Fri Nov 1 12:37:07 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0629411E817A for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 12:37:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y2m5Cv3Mxurg for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 12:37:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.openlinksw.com (mail.openlinksw.com [63.119.36.38]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6DE211E8146 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 12:37:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dyn226.usnet.private ([192.168.11.226]) by mail.openlinksw.com with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.74) (envelope-from ) id 1VcKWj-0006gp-Ev for webfinger@ietf.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 15:37:01 -0400 Message-ID: <527402DD.5010707@openlinksw.com> Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 15:37:01 -0400 From: Kingsley Idehen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: webfinger@ietf.org References: <525D9646.7010306@packetizer.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms090603040209060900050209" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Vision for Webfinger - what are we doing? X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org 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: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 19:37:07 -0000 This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms090603040209060900050209 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040208020208080500020508" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040208020208080500020508 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11/1/13 11:13 AM, Bob Wyman wrote: > Eric, you wrote: > "Webfinger is a standard way to attach information to an email address.= " > > This isn't really accurate. It would be much better written as:=20 > "Webfinger provides a standard mechanism that can be used to associate = > data with an email address." As far as I know: Webfinger enables the use of mailto: scheme (I think), acct: scheme, and = http: scheme (I think) as identifiers that *denote* (or "refer to")=20 agents (e.g., people, organizations, and other entities capable of=20 mechanized behavior) in a manner that also *identifies* the location of=20 their descriptors (documents that describe the aforementioned entities). Links: [1] Denotation -- http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/denotation . [2] Identification --=20 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/identification . --=20 Regards, Kingsley Idehen=09 Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen --------------040208020208080500020508 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 11/1/13 11:13 AM, Bob Wyman wrote:<= br>
Eric, you wrote:
"Webfinger is a standard way to attach information to an email address. "

This isn't really accurate. It would be much better written as: "Webfinger provides a standard mechanism that can be used to associate data with an email address."
As far as I know:

Webfinger enables the use of mailto: scheme (I think), acct: scheme, and http: scheme (I think) as identifiers that *denote* (or "refer to") agents (e.g., people, organizations, and other entities capable of mechanized behavior) in a manner that also *identifies* the location of their descriptors (documents that describe the aforementioned entities). 

Links:

[1] Denotation -- http:= //www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/denotation .
[2] Identification -- h= ttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/identification .
--=20

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	     =20
Founder & CEO=20
OpenLink Software    =20
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767=
740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
--------------040208020208080500020508-- --------------ms090603040209060900050209 Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIEtTCC BLEwggOZoAMCAQICAgYyMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBDQUAMEExIzAhBgNVBAMMGk9wZW5MaW5rIFNv ZnR3YXJlIExvY2FsIENBMRowGAYDVQQKDBFPcGVuTGluayBTb2Z0d2FyZTAeFw0xMzEwMzEy MTIzNThaFw0xMzExMzAyMTIzNThaMH0xHDAaBgNVBAMTE0tpbmdzbGV5IFV5aSBJZGVoZW4x HDAaBgNVBAoTE1BlcnNvbmFsIERhdGEgU3BhY2UxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMQswCQYDVQQIEwJN QTElMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJARYWa2lkZWhlbkBvcGVubGlua3N3LmNvbTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAJwoj0+oA8VrXCXrevUzgO4YbkqiskAHjaRcigzTjM/KBrD8 reNuMI+UtHPmHDfQa3ULYFmIlpQA90qtnHqI5RW9INpYl612j16Yvhw8R1ZXW/lsTuZxs71r 0WhpM+8zOWx8PFWABuaHTxD+FOBN5nM4xhnkfQ/62MudWF0nbbnSfCaixoqs+HK30dlclBbq /iSgdMMepvw+hc9yynlfu1LGKiLKtXVFaImdv1cTp/fjY4L/Njc1xwkPH7Ey+EQiUb7oAqQ4 HSTrnFfSfXT5/bQEoRru6M0LmlYqFFoOnPeG3nooOz7XntBter7c0L6Cq+GTW108KUnbEn0t ff3i5OsCAwEAAaOCAXUwggFxMB0GA1UdDgQWBBQtLAxh06QwuUl3ZRUIA+nv0+PNLTBsBgNV HREEZTBjhklodHRwOi8vaWQubXlvcGVubGluay5uZXQvYWJvdXQvaWQvZW50aXR5L2h0dHAv d3d3LmxpbmtlZGluLmNvbS9pbi9raWRlaGVugRZraWRlaGVuQG9wZW5saW5rc3cuY29tMD4G A1UdEgQ3MDWGM2h0dHA6Ly9pZC5teW9wZW5saW5rLm5ldC9pc3N1ZXIva2V5L2RiYS9pZF9y c2EjdGhpczA2BglghkgBhvhCAQ0EKRYnQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgR2VuZXJhdGVkIGJ5IE9wZW5M aW5rIFlvdUlEMCAGA1UdJQEB/wQWMBQGCCsGAQUFBwMCBggrBgEFBQcDBDA4BghghkgBtp9J AQQsFipodHRwOi8vaWQubXlvcGVubGluay5uZXQvY2VydGdlbi9rZXkvMTAzODMwDgYDVR0P AQH/BAQDAgWgMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBDQUAA4IBAQBKKUflPTxWBsmusCT9XR3rq0fKbkT7l9bJ LvjjTauOgvKnuww8OhhErg0uB5DbeFAEuqOwkWGIp2/vUz3AlBUrMsjtJKYKEMq13sSLSkLI 4r81PRdGtMChv23kyYLff/0CkYyoy2ZWTu+K/A5uCZQylMZ8jhQADssGUY/JojWMQ1CV4sU+ TMDlXa96gPbqGq/iAH+l3U3pditP9lnS00R12B6DQ3G7NahKWxSUJRPQ/xNT7O07GIXOCQNX 6IUKfHhRBB6cxvJ6TgDvviZX5OcHCaKlKdHqBUZ4cxcHpEx93BlCABfFfUqY2V9RcrIkWv8X 9m5STK1vIfGuy3w7yw+wMYIC7zCCAusCAQEwRzBBMSMwIQYDVQQDDBpPcGVuTGluayBTb2Z0 d2FyZSBMb2NhbCBDQTEaMBgGA1UECgwRT3BlbkxpbmsgU29mdHdhcmUCAgYyMAkGBSsOAwIa BQCgggF9MBgGCSqGSIb3DQEJAzELBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTEzMTEw MTE5MzcwMVowIwYJKoZIhvcNAQkEMRYEFHwgm10Pi1+fzfDRfOCYnfZZko07MFYGCSsGAQQB gjcQBDFJMEcwQTEjMCEGA1UEAwwaT3BlbkxpbmsgU29mdHdhcmUgTG9jYWwgQ0ExGjAYBgNV BAoMEU9wZW5MaW5rIFNvZnR3YXJlAgIGMjBYBgsqhkiG9w0BCRACCzFJoEcwQTEjMCEGA1UE AwwaT3BlbkxpbmsgU29mdHdhcmUgTG9jYWwgQ0ExGjAYBgNVBAoMEU9wZW5MaW5rIFNvZnR3 YXJlAgIGMjBsBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xXzBdMAsGCWCGSAFlAwQBKjALBglghkgBZQMEAQIwCgYI KoZIhvcNAwcwDgYIKoZIhvcNAwICAgCAMA0GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgFAMAcGBSsOAwIHMA0GCCqG SIb3DQMCAgEoMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIIBAJpk5eHgobusRqKWEeJiBc7YddHWl8ElvlOl IyaRI60PGuFbBk0+1+c3XOlzw+dQXTSLoxFoULhRSMnLxPw8HLUJy/0VfzkzUjfn9ZhFM0Bm 1+5c4PbJ4kAdw9gzh/QXGWDKBwR+eLxQgS5jO/FvAe5wW6vA4ny7rnOc8i1f85qjLN578oy0 1/WpHuC67/L+GiVpsorVBM6Vzk4ZtHhUujaLEEr/C4B++TUwuLK7jod/U3YNtFgv+ntLcPt9 bskmQd8k0jJDycdqqZTFyFrmL3RS2sjQwhm5ij3C+LddwizFXxzOBjF5IyYoRj0/GmWQ/siU IYfz0ReXWqHq9/s8+/wAAAAAAAA= --------------ms090603040209060900050209--