> Of Eve Maler
> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 10:54 AM
> To: OAuth WG
> Subject: [OAUTH-WG] UMA use cases (was Re: proposed agenda for second
> interim meeting)
>
> Sorry for the delay, and thanks for the push. In scrambling to
> approve a passel of scenarios and p
Maler
> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 10:54 AM
> To: OAuth WG
> Subject: [OAUTH-WG] UMA use cases (was Re: proposed agenda for second
> interim meeting)
>
> Sorry for the delay, and thanks for the push. In scrambling to
> approve a passel of scenarios and produce ou
red misuse
-Original Message-
From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Eve
Maler
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 10:54 AM
To: OAuth WG
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] UMA use cases (was Re: proposed agenda for second interim
meeting)
Sorry for the delay, and than
idered misuse
-Original Message-
From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Eve
Maler
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 10:54 AM
To: OAuth WG
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] UMA use cases (was Re: proposed agenda for second interim
meeting)
Sorry for the delay, and
On 2010-02-03, at 10:54 AM, Eve Maler wrote:
>
> - There is a conceptual similarity between the UMA and WRAP entities, but our
> analysis so far shows it to be shallow in spots. For example, WRAP's
> "protected resource" maps fairly well to an UMA "host" (which may host any
> number of prote
Sorry for the delay, and thanks for the push. In scrambling to approve a
passel of scenarios and produce our webinar last week, we got a bit behind.
(By the way, complete recordings are now available. Their quality is not
perfect, but should suffice. Please see
http://kantarainitiative.org/
