- Time: 08:00 PT | 11:00 ET | 15:00 UTC/GMT (Time Chart)
- Skype: +9900827042954214
- US Dial-In: +1-201-793-9022
- Room Code: 295-4214
1) Roll Call
Voting & Present
- Paul Trevithick
- Scott Cantor
- RL "Bob" Morgan
- Benoit Bailleux
- Keith Uber
- John Bradley
Non-voting & Present
- Dale Olds
- Andreas Solberg
Non-voting & Not present:
- Valeska O'Leary
- Bob Pinhero
- Gael Gourmelen
Potentially Voting & Not present:
- Philippe Clement
- Axel Nennker
- Trent Adams
Quorate meeting (6 of 8)
3) Review Action Items
- Bob to find out Andreas' availability for joining calls
- Paul to create a Doodle poll to see about moving this call to another day at the same time
- Bob: Andreas posted some very interesting discovery-related items to another list in the last few hours. Bob to re-post or ask Andreas.
- Valeska: continue to manage Kevin to get v5 implemented
- Paul: this is still in progress, perhaps for next Monday
- Paul & Valeska: document UI design decisions within next 3 weeks
- Keith: look into language discovery options and post to list
- Keith: I sent an email to Bob Sunday of Canada and others, since Canada and Mikael Linden must have addressed this issue. We're looking pointers, tips or specs on how this is done. I'll report back to the list when I've heard back
4) Axel's JSON Schema
- He just re-published a link today
- Scott: there was a basic issue as to does what we're doing have to be compatible with the Mozilla project
- Bob: recent discussions with the Mozilla folks indicate that they are thinking about an API
- Scott: I favor creating our own as opposed to trying to collaborate. The problem was that the original proposal was protocol-centric and thus repeated a bunch of things.
- Scott: The work that Andreas and others have done doesn't involved claims-based filtering or things to support an active client.
- Paul: We'll be working actively on implementing this stuff for a next-gen active client
- Scott: For me to pick this up would be mid-to-late April
- John: Microsoft has delivered a new claims description and rolled out clients that support it. Is part of what you're thinking WRT the Claims Agent WG?
- Scott: If Microsoft is coming out with something that is extensible enough to support other things, then I'd be interested to work with them, compromise, etc.
- John: OpenID (JSON) is progressing, we have SAML, we have U-Prove. Do want a converged claims request description that works across protocols, or are we going to retreat back into something protocol-specific.
- Paul: I think that a cross-protocol description IS needed and we can start putting resources into this in a couple of months
- John: From an OpenID perspective I'd like to see a format that can handle claims aggregation. I've been talking to Eve about her claims 2.0 stuff. A high level claims requirements description would be a useful thing to have.
- Bob: Is there a scope question? Is that what's needed to support ULX.
- John: It's needed to support any multi-protocol user agent
- Bob: How is this different from XRD
- John: XRD never said about how to specify required claims. I'm talking more about how you describe what claims you want. And perhaps even split up the request across multiple protocols (OpenID vs. U-Prove, etc.)
- Bob: That seems out of scope from ULX
- John: Yes, it might be out of scope for ULX
- Scott: The assumption was that if we were going to incorporate IMI as part of the ULX work, then we'd have to do claims matching across the two parties. If that's not relevant anymore, then we're left with SAML and OpenID and we could punt on trying to describe claims cross protocol.
- Scott: I'm not going to solicit input from folks (e.g. OpenID) if they're not going to show up to the conversation
- Scott: There are at least two code bases that could be adapted SAML community code and Andrea's code.
- Next call: Monday 21st
- No call on Monday 28th
- Action Item: Paul to send a new doodle to find a better day than Mondays