{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reTHINK-project/specs/issues/11","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reTHINK-project/specs","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reTHINK-project/specs/issues/11/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reTHINK-project/specs/issues/11/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reTHINK-project/specs/issues/11/events","html_url":"https://github.com/reTHINK-project/specs/issues/11","id":182335551,"number":11,"title":"Identities from legacy domains","user":{"login":"pchainho","id":3893553,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/3893553?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/pchainho","html_url":"https://github.com/pchainho","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pchainho/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pchainho/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pchainho/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pchainho/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pchainho/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pchainho/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pchainho/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pchainho/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pchainho/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2016-10-11T18:15:41Z","updated_at":"2016-10-11T18:15:41Z","closed_at":null,"body":"The current specs to support [interoperability with legacy domains](https://github.com/reTHINK-project/specs/tree/master/legacy-interworking) proposes the possibility to associate a second legacy identity to hyperties when interworking with legacy services.\r\n\r\nOne option could be not to associate this second legacy identity during deploy time but only when the Hyperty is interworking with legacy services. It would require from the IdM:\r\n\r\n* to have identities associated with legacy domains: let's call it \"Legacy Identities\" \r\n* such \"legacy identity# would prevail be the one used when the outgoing message is targeting the legacy domain, instead of the hyperty associated with sender hyperty"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"pchainho"}}