Child pages
  • UMA telecon 2020-04-30

Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.


Eve had an AI to find our old ecosystem/co-location of parties work. Our oldest writeup is gone, but the new version is on slides 14 and 15 of our Legal Role Definitions deck. Slide 15 in particular shows how a wide ecosystem can be "narrowed" when different Operators are co-located in a single entity. Adrian notes that MyData came out with its Operators paper yesterday. It's not technology-specific but is surely relevant here as well. He also points to this governance paper. The relevance of "ecosystem shape and size" is that the resource definitions profile we might define could apply to ecosystems not of the widest possible size but of potentially limited size or shape. In other words, the profile could make assumptions about co-location of certain services. Jim provides this writeup on fiduciaries.

The goal in ACE for its AS-first flow is to achieve disconnection opportunities for the RS, which is not the purpose of the resource definition profile – but it would probably be a good idea to consider compatible profiling for the two sets of use cases (resource definition and constrained environments) so they could be used at the same time.


This value to the "requesting side" is apart from the privacy-respecting value. This could even be valuable to a big company with ten different IdPs or other RS's internally, using the same (proprietary) API. Please So we think there is definitely horizontal/broad relevance to working on this profile Please continue reviewing the use cases in the comments below and discussing on the list.