[TSG-Access-RD] [Ext] RE: RDAP Operational Models

[Francisco Arias]

Are you saying there is no way to separate the function of identity provider from authorizing body?

-- 
Francisco

On 2/5/19, 4:34 AM, "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck at verisign.com> wrote:

    No, that's what the identity providers do. In the pictures where there's no identity provider, authentication would be done by the RDAP server operator.
    
    Scott
    
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Francisco Arias <francisco.arias at icann.org>
    > Sent: Monday, February 4, 2019 8:19 PM
    > To: Hollenbeck, Scott <shollenbeck at verisign.com>; tsg-access-rd at icann.org
    > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [TSG-Access-RD] RDAP Operational Models
    >
    > Hi Scott,
    >
    > Aren't we missing the authenticators in the models?
    >
    > --
    > Francisco
    >
    > On 2/1/19, 11:18 AM, "TSG-Access-RD on behalf of Hollenbeck, Scott via TSG-
    > Access-RD" <tsg-access-rd-bounces at icann.org on behalf of tsg-access-
    > rd at icann.org> wrote:
    >
    >     I just uploaded three documents to the Google Drive as part of the effort
    > Andy and I volunteered for to develop background material for our final
    > output. They're named "RDAP Model X", and each document contains a
    > drawing of interactions between players in different operational scenarios.
    > I'm suggesting that we should describe as many of these models as we can
    > identify to better document available options.
    >
    >     RDAP Model 1: AN ICANN-run proxy service with client
    > identification/authentication responsibilities delegated to identity providers.
    >
    >     RDAP Model 2: AN ICANN-run proxy service with client
    > identification/authentication responsibilities held within ICANN.
    >
    >     RDAP Model 3: Direct client-to-registry/registrar services with client
    > identification/authentication responsibilities delegated to identity providers.
    >
    >     Are there any other models worth capturing? I didn't mention "Direct
    > client-to-registry/registrar services with client identification/authentication
    > responsibilities held by the registries/registrars" because we've already
    > discussed how that model doesn't scale well. It would be worth mentioning
    > in the text only to note that it was discussed and dismissed.
    >
    >     Scott
    >
    >