Re: [OAUTH-WG] New Version Notification for draft-hunt-oauth-pop-architecture-00.txt

2014-04-06 Thread Anthony Nadalin
, April 3, 2014 11:32 AM To: John Bradley; Phil Hunt Cc: oauth@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] New Version Notification for draft-hunt-oauth-pop-architecture-00.txt I agree with what John wrote below. Besides, PoP is more natural to say than HoK and certainly more natural to say than HOTK. I'd

Re: [OAUTH-WG] New Version Notification for draft-hunt-oauth-pop-architecture-00.txt

2014-04-04 Thread Thomas Hardjono
f.org] on behalf of Bill Mills [wmi...@yahoo-inc.com] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 12:06 PM To: Phil Hunt; Prateek Mishra; Hannes Tschofenig; Justin Richer; OAuth WG Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] New Version Notification for draft-hunt-oauth-pop-architecture-00.txt I really *like* the name "proof

Re: [OAUTH-WG] New Version Notification for draft-hunt-oauth-pop-architecture-00.txt

2014-04-04 Thread Bill Mills
I really *like* the name "proof of possession", but I think the acronym PoP is going to be confused with POP.  HOTK has the advantage of not being a homonym for aything else.  What about "Possession Proof"?   -bill William J. Mills "Paranoid" MUX Yahoo! On T

Re: [OAUTH-WG] New Version Notification for draft-hunt-oauth-pop-architecture-00.txt

2014-04-03 Thread Mike Jones
-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of John Bradley Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 11:10 AM To: Phil Hunt Cc: oauth@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] New Version Notification for draft-hunt-oauth-pop-architecture-00.txt Some people and specs associate holder of key with asymmetric keys. Proof of possessi

Re: [OAUTH-WG] New Version Notification for draft-hunt-oauth-pop-architecture-00.txt

2014-04-03 Thread John Bradley
Some people and specs associate holder of key with asymmetric keys. Proof of possession is thought to be a broader category including symmetric and key agreement eg http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2875. NIST defines the term PoP Protocol http://fismapedia.org/index.php?title=Term:Proof_of_Posses

Re: [OAUTH-WG] New Version Notification for draft-hunt-oauth-pop-architecture-00.txt

2014-04-03 Thread Phil Hunt
What was wrong with HOK? Aside: Why was “the” so important in HOTK? Phil @independentid www.independentid.com phil.h...@oracle.com On Apr 3, 2014, at 9:37 AM, Anil Saldhana wrote: > Prateek, > why not just use "proof"? > > draft-hunt-oauth-proof-architecture-00.txt > > Is that allowed by

Re: [OAUTH-WG] New Version Notification for draft-hunt-oauth-pop-architecture-00.txt

2014-04-03 Thread Anil Saldhana
Prateek, why not just use "proof"? draft-hunt-oauth-proof-architecture-00.txt Is that allowed by IETF? Regards, Anil On 04/03/2014 11:30 AM, Prateek Mishra wrote: "key confirmed" or "key confirmation" is another term that is widely used for these use-cases I really *like* the name "proof o

Re: [OAUTH-WG] New Version Notification for draft-hunt-oauth-pop-architecture-00.txt

2014-04-03 Thread Prateek Mishra
"key confirmed" or "key confirmation" is another term that is widely used for these use-cases I really *like* the name "proof of possession", but I think the acronym PoP is going to be confused with POP. HOTK has the advantage of not being a homonym for aything else. What about "Possession Proo