Skip to end of metadata
  • Created by Former user, last modified by Former user on Aug 24, 2010
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 2 Next »

UMA telecon 2010-08-19

Date and Time

  • WG telecon on Thursday, 19 Aug 2010, at 9-10:30am PT (time chart)
    • Skype line "C": +9900827042954214
    • US: +1-201-793-9022 | Room Code: 295-4214

Agenda

  • Administrative
  • Resource/scope registration discussion
    • Hopefully lots of new fodder coming out in email by Thursday...
    • Discuss any impacts on Steps 1-3 if possible
  • AOB

Attendees

As of 11 Aug 2010, quorum is 6 of 11.

  1. Fletcher, George
  2. Hardjono, Thomas
  3. Holodnik, Tom
  4. Machulak, Maciej
  5. Moren, Lukasz

Non-voting participants:

  • Kevin Cox
  • Herve Ganem
  • Gerry Gebel
  • Mark Lizar
  • Anna Ticktin (staff)

Regrets:

  • Domenico Catalano

Minutes

AI summary

2009-12-03-4

Eve

Open

Add terms-negotiation scenarios to Scenarios document.

 

2010-08-12-1

Eve, Mario

Open

Meet to discuss how to move forward on the Scenarios and Use Cases document.

 

2010-08-12-2

Mario

Open

Revise the Scenarios and Use Cases document by end of August.

 

2010-08-12-3

Maciej, Christian, Eve

Open

Write up answers to the philosophical questions posed on 2010-08-12 related to resource/scope registration, for the SMART implementation, resource registration spec, and scope registration spec proposal respectively.

 

Roll call

Quorum was not reached.

Discussion on Resource/scope registration

The group discusses resource registration and where state about protected resources needs to be maintained. George provides an example: widget code on the website can talk to the instant messaging app. No need for maintaining state of the Host anywhere.
The problem is as following: User at the host deleted some resources. Some client asks for a resource at the AM - should the AM be aware that this resource does not exist? Another angle of the problem: the user disassociated a resource from a policy at the AM (resource no longer protected). If a requester asks for the resource at the host - what should the host do? Should the host say that it is UMA protected?
User interacting both with the host and the central server - AM. The host is saying to the AM -

  • No labels