Re: [Auth]Freport Update

[Albert Scherbinsky]

John wrote:
> As I said before, I only believe that people should be informed, and if
> Hans can show me that the transactional metadata cannot be collected
> under his current design *in any sane usage scenario*, then I will
> renounce my objection: and probably apologize.

I find this is a very useful discussion to be having. Thanks
for bringing this important topic up, John. It is this very
usage scenario that I am most interested in also. It was my
current belief that IDSec could be used effectively in a
Self Managed scenario, although I have been taking this
somewhat on faith. As you know, I share the mistrust of
third party Profile Managers. I think making the distinction
between 'abstract design' and 'implementation architecture'
could be useful. It would satisfy me, if the abstract design
of IDSec allowed for both 'Third-Party Managed' and 'Self
Managed' implementation architectures. Implementors can then
choose to just implement Self Managed Profiles if that is
their imperative.

Regards, 
Albert Scherbinsky
Drop by at: http://members.rogers.com/alberts/

Convenient control of our personal information:
Single Login:
http://members.rogers.com/alberts/single.htm
Simple Interface Markup Language:
http://members.rogers.com/alberts/siml.htm
Personal Information Base XML
http://members.rogers.com/alberts/PIB.htm