<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: OpenID Whitelist</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itickr.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=79" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itickr.com/?p=79</link>
	<description>Tracking Identity</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 05:06:28 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: itickr.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; OpenID Thoughts</title>
		<link>http://itickr.com/?p=79&#038;cpage=1#comment-932</link>
		<dc:creator>itickr.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; OpenID Thoughts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 2008 18:48:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itickr.com/?p=79#comment-932</guid>
		<description>[...] that led to the discussion of OpenID whitelist. One might argue that it&#8217;s against the spirit of OpenID. Anyone should be allowed to run an [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] that led to the discussion of OpenID whitelist. One might argue that it&#8217;s against the spirit of OpenID. Anyone should be allowed to run an [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: itickr.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Identity Mashup</title>
		<link>http://itickr.com/?p=79&#038;cpage=1#comment-491</link>
		<dc:creator>itickr.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Identity Mashup</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 05:21:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itickr.com/?p=79#comment-491</guid>
		<description>[...] is a conventional family. It’s not like we are asking for exclusivity but at least some kind of white list will be [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is a conventional family. It’s not like we are asking for exclusivity but at least some kind of white list will be [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Identity 2.0 &#187; Blog Archive &#187; OpenID Whitelist</title>
		<link>http://itickr.com/?p=79&#038;cpage=1#comment-239</link>
		<dc:creator>Identity 2.0 &#187; Blog Archive &#187; OpenID Whitelist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:46:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itickr.com/?p=79#comment-239</guid>
		<description>[...] the original post here: OpenID Whitelist Identity [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the original post here: OpenID Whitelist Identity [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Not So OpenID &#171; Identity Blogger</title>
		<link>http://itickr.com/?p=79&#038;cpage=1#comment-238</link>
		<dc:creator>Not So OpenID &#171; Identity Blogger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:14:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itickr.com/?p=79#comment-238</guid>
		<description>[...] will support OpenID, but only from a select White List of providers. Ashish Jain has his thoughts here and relates his experiences trying to get SignOn.com added as a [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] will support OpenID, but only from a select White List of providers. Ashish Jain has his thoughts here and relates his experiences trying to get SignOn.com added as a [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
