XDI.ORG I-Services Specifications
1. Introduction
This is the home page for the specifications for the interoperable XRI/XDI services that will be available from XDI.ORG-accredited i-brokers. These specifications are referenced by the [http://gss.xdi.org XDI.ORG Global Services Specifications (GSS)]. By GSS policy, to maintain their accrediation i-brokers must offer certain of these i-services (currently all three listed below), and b) implement these i-services in conformance with these specifications as a means of ensuring interoperability, security, and privacy of XRI/XDI infrastructure.
The I-Services specifications currently cover the following three mandatory i-services:
1.1. I-Name Single Sign-On (ISSO) Service
ISSO combines XRI resolution with the [http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=security SAML (Security Assertion Markup Language) 2.0 authentication protocol] to achieve a simple, standardized SSO user experience at any site that supports ISSO. Note that discussion is currently underway about also supporting a lightweight HTTP SSO protocol in addition to SAML 2.0 see LightweightAuthnProtocol.
1.2. Contact Service
This service specifies how to couple an XRI with a Web-searchable contact page that uses ISSO or email authentication to enable authenticated contact requests. It also includes an integrated reputation service to prevent both machine- and human-generated spam.
1.3. I-Link Service (XRI Local Resolution Service)
I-Link service (technically, XRI local resolution service as defined in the [http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/Xri2Cd02/ResolutionChanges proposed revisions to the XRI Resolution 2.0 protocol]), allows i-name registrants at any delegation level to assign their own slash names (e.g. "=my.name/some.resource.name") to any URI-, IRI-, or XRI- addressable resource.
2. Specification Files
This section maintains a link to current and previous drafts of specifications.
2.1. I-Services Specification File
This is the primary specification document, currently maintained in MS Word, and periodically published as a PDF.
INSTRUCTIONS TO AUTHORS: Update the status line when checking the file in or out. For each check-in, append a new line at the top of the list and edit the previous line to mark it a previous version (do not delete links to previous versions.) Do not change the filename - use the next highest version number for a major change and add version letters for minor changes.
CURRENT STATUS: Version 08 checked in by DrummondReed. Available for editing.
- CURRENT VERSION - PDF: attachment:i-services-working-draft-08.pdf, WORD: attachment:i-services-working-draft-08.doc
- Previous version: None (previously managed offsite)
2.2. Visio Diagram File
These Visio diagrams are used for illustrations included in the primary specification document.
INSTRUCTIONS TO AUTHORS: See above.
CURRENT STATUS: Version 08b checked in by KunalGandhi Available for editing.
- CURRENT VERSION: attachment:i-services-sequence-diagrams-08b.vsd
- Previous version: None (previously managed offsite)
3. Active Discussions
This section maintains a list of links to pages used to manage current active discussions about changes/additions to the spec. Please add a page at the top of the list to introduce a new discussion topic. Note the algorithm used to name discussion pages:
IservicesSpecs/TopicNoXX/NameOfTopic
This multi-level name approach (in the absence of full XRI identification) allows us to establish a unique ID for the topic that will not change for its lifecycle, and then establish a semantic name under that which can change (and lead to a new refactored page) if the semantic understanding of the topic changes (which is very frequent in development).
3.1. Topic #1: Adding a Lightweight SSO Protocol
IservicesSpecs/TopicNo1/LightweightSsoProtocol discusses the potential for adding support to ISSO for a lightweight HTTP-based authentication protocol in addition to SAML 2.0.
3.2. Topic #2: Anti-Phishing Solution
IservicesSpecs/TopicNo2/AntiPhishingSolution discusses the current solution to the much-discussed problem of providing anti-phishing protection and explores two alternatives.
