Re: [xdi] FW: [Dnssec-deployment] 3 years on, 1/3 done?

Thanks for taking the time Drummond.

Ah I see. Cloud names and numbers, smart. When I said associated directories, I meant the XDI registries, and it made me think there's a good argument for coining an equivalent term to help understanding. Ie. perhaps a CNS for 'Cloud Naming System' to explain how it is similar and then different to the role for DNS.

On this note I wanted to alert you to a new Kantara Initiative working group I have been starting up, CloudIDsec, for Cloud Identity best practices:

http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/CloudID/Charter

The idea being to define models for how to implement the Kantara framework as managed services = IDaaS - Identity as a Service. I'd like to feature XDI registries as part of this if relevant now to do so..

With this in mind I have also had a first crack at defining the role of XDI within a Government ID architecture. Members of the Kantara team include the architects behind the New Zealand's "Real Me" identity service, and there is great opportunity to specify how XDI might build on this (SAML based) foundation to add another layer to Government ID services.

I've set the scene for combination in this 'G-Cloud 2.0' white paper:

http://cloudbestpractices.net/g-cloud-2-0/

Have a great vacation, catch up when you're back....

Cheers, Neil.

On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Drummond Reed <drummond.reed@xdi.org> wrote:

Neil, I'm racing to get ready for my vacation so a few quick bullet points:
XDI as a semantic data interchange format and protocol operates at the level of standards like RDF (as a format), HTTP (as a protocol), and XAMCL (as a policy _expression_ language). So it's uses are potentially very broad - as broad as the uses for those techologies are.

Although what used to be XRIs are now just called XDI addresses, XDI is completely based on the idea of globally addressable data graphs, and the root nodes of those graphs still represent digital identities. So what from a marketing perspective were called "i-names" and "i-numbers" in XRI are now called "cloud names" and "cloud numbers" in XDI.

There will be cloud name and cloud number registries -- that's one facet of what will emerge as XDI infrastructure. (This is something XDI.org, Respect Network, and Neustar are working on.)
At the same time, XDI identifiers are more flexible and inclusive than XRIs, so almost any existing identifier that can be expresses as a URI can be turned into an XDI address (e.g., telephone numbers, email addresses, etc.).

You mention "the associated directories". In XDI, the endpoint of an XDI address is an XDI graph -- which certainly could be a directory, but it can also be any form of data semantically described in XDI.

Right now, those most actively pushing forward XDI as a standard are all focused on the emergence of the personal cloud industry, and in particular on the emergence of personal cloud networks where XDI is the protocol for communication and interoperation between personal clouds. For more about this, see the Respect Network website.

I hope this helps. Note that I'll be offline on vacation for the next week.

Best,

=Drummond

On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 3:08 AM, Neil McEvoy <neil.mcevoy@ifossfoundation.org> wrote:

If XDI is crystalizing, what are the likely next steps for broader adoption, in laymans terms?

I understood the concept of i-names and the associated directories - Is that still the implementation model? So would the goal be to build out that type of supplier industry?

Regards, Neil.

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 8:06 PM, Drummond Reed <drummond.reed@xdi.org> wrote:

Les, thanks for sending this (I did finally get it once we debugged the XDI.org mail server).

I think you are very right. Another way to look at it is that "simple is hard". Working out the XDI graph model so that it is "as simple as possible but no simpler" has taken a good long time.

Good things take time ;-)

Best,

=Drummond

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Chasen, Les <les.chasen@neustar.biz> wrote:

Hi all,

I am forwarding this email from a DNSSEC email list because of this quote
at the end of the email.

"things that take a long time to mature seem to live longer"

I think this applies to XDI. Read the whole note below. It has a few
references that you may find interesting.

- Les

-----Original Message-----
From: Edward Lewis <ed.lewis@neustar.biz>
Date: Friday, July 19, 2013 8:29 AM
To: "dnssec-deployment@dnssec-deployment.org"
<dnssec-deployment@dnssec-deployment.org>
Cc: "Lewis, Ed" <Lewis@neustar.biz>
Subject: Re: [Dnssec-deployment] 3 years on, 1/3 done?

>
>On Jul 16, 2013, at 6:15, Jan-Piet Mens wrote:
>>
>> I hope you'll forgive my sarcasm.
>
>
>I've been staring at this in my in-box wondering if there's a worthwhile
>reply.
>
>The fact that 1/3rd of the TLDs are signed is not a statement that it is
>taking off, in fact, the number of signed TLDs has been fairly flat for
>many months. In this calendar year very few TLDs have started signing, 3
>"ascii" ccTLDs and 2 "idn" ccTLDs. I've noticed newly signed TLDs this
>year on Jan 22, Apr 2, 5, 21, and Jun 20. (My dates are the day after
>the event, when my monitors "pick it up.") That's not a fast rise, less
>than one a month!
>
>There's even been a "retreat" - on May 8 one ccTLD ceased signing. In the
>past there's a case of a ccTLD signing, stopping, then resuming. Natural
>course of engineering.
>
>In just about all TLDs where DS records are present for more than even,
>maybe, 2% of the delegations, there is a financial incentive. Not just
>the example you've cited, but in just about all of them. Where there's
>no incentive, DNSSEC is present but scant. (Lesson - economics trumps
>technology!)
>
>"So what?"
>
>DNSSEC can be described as using a tank to kill a fly. Or it can be the
>foundation of a more secured Internet, an enabler of DANE. Expectations
>of adoption rate are set by someone's interest in seeing DNSSEC or an
>alternative succeed or fail. But expectations are just figments of the
>imagination.
>
>Looking at other cases of something being created and then dispersed,
>things that take a long time to mature seem to live longer. Biologically
>this has been studied, organisms that mature quickly have shorter
>lifespans. As with any scientific study, it's best to read the reports
>and check out the caveats. (See papers like this
>http://www.senescence.info/comparative_biology.html and
>http://www.jax.org/news/archives/2012/aging-pnas.html)
>
>Engineers like spectacular growth rates. Nature does not.
>
>PS. The Internet is 40 years old and still is used by only 1/3rd of the
>world's population. ;) Just had to add that "red herring."
>(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring)
>
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>-
>Edward Lewis
>NeuStar You can leave a voice message at
>+1-571-434-5468
>
>There are no answers - just tradeoffs, decisions, and responses.
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

--
Neil McEvoy
VP Business Development
iFOSSF.org
Skype:neil.mcevoy1

--
Neil McEvoy
VP Business Development
iFOSSF.org
Skype:neil.mcevoy1

xdi message