Re: [Ace] Parameter abbreviation number ranges for draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz

Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> Mon, 27 August 2018 16:20 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.com>
X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86634130E07 for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 09:20:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tM9eFyw5DFYl for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 09:20:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.augustcellars.com (augustcellars.com [50.45.239.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5723C130E06 for <ace@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 09:20:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Jude (73.180.8.170) by mail2.augustcellars.com (192.168.0.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1347.2; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 09:16:06 -0700
From: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: 'Ludwig Seitz' <ludwig.seitz@ri.se>, <ace@ietf.org>
References: <ed5a89e7-e2ed-8804-037f-8b50d2bc6d64@ri.se>
In-Reply-To: <ed5a89e7-e2ed-8804-037f-8b50d2bc6d64@ri.se>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 09:19:51 -0700
Message-ID: <02f901d43e21$ca195e10$5e4c1a30$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQGmsbrlMYcGK1pU4ekVFpBcUUSxNqUu33Rw
Content-Language: en-us
X-Originating-IP: [73.180.8.170]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ace/qCUw_02sGfAM3VIHeHXMUNA2M_g>
Subject: Re: [Ace] Parameter abbreviation number ranges for draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz
X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" <ace.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ace>, <mailto:ace-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ace/>
List-Post: <mailto:ace@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ace-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace>, <mailto:ace-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 16:20:03 -0000


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ace <ace-bounces@ietf.org>; On Behalf Of Ludwig Seitz
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2018 12:52 AM
> To: ace@ietf.org
> Subject: [Ace] Parameter abbreviation number ranges for
draft-ietf-ace-oauth-
> authz
> 
> Hello group,
> 
> at IETF 102 there was a discussion about the numerical abbreviations we
> introduced for both OAuth parameter names and access token claim names.
> 
> I have generated a proposal that makes better use of the number space, but
I'd
> like the OAuth specialists to have a look at it and see if I pushed any
important
> (= frequently used) OAuth parameter into the two byte number range.
> 
> 
> Background:
> 
> CBOR integers have a very compact representation (1 byte) for numbers from
> 0-23, from 24-255 (which is all we will ever need ;-) ) they use 2 bytes.
Thus
> we'd like to use abbreviations in the first number range for
parameters/claims
> that are frequently used.
> 
> My proposal follow below, please feel free to comment.
> 
> 
> /Ludwig
> ================================================================
> ================
> 
> 
> Existing claim name abbreviations from RFC 8392 (CWT) :
>   iss  1
>   sub  2
>   aud  3
>   exp  4
>   nbf  5
>   iat  6
>   cti  7
> 
> New claim name abbreviation introduced by
> draft-ietf-ace-cwt-proof-of-possession:
> 
>   cnf  8
> 
> New claims introduced by draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz (with proposed
> abbreviations):
> 
>   scope 9
>   profile 10
>   rs_cnf 11
> 
> Token endpoint parameters from RFC 6749 (OAuth 2.0) (with proposed
> abbreviations):
> 
> scope 9
> error 12
> grant_type 13
> access_token 14
> token_type 15
> 
> client_id      24
> client_secret  25
> response_type  26
> state 27
> redirect_uri 28
> error_description 29
> error_uri 30
> code 31
> expires_in 32
> username 33
> password 34
> refresh_token 35

[JLS] I would be willing to push error_description and error_uri up into the
two byte range I don't think they fall into the frequently used category in
a working system.  I don't know that we need to keep client_id,
client_secret, username and password in the low range at this time.   Do we
really think that we are going to be using this on small devices?

> 
> New token endpoint parameters introduced by draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz
(with
> proposed abbreviations):
> 
> req_aud 16
> req_cnf 17
> used_cnf 18
> rs_cnf 19
> 
> (Note that req_* and used_cnf are not yet in the draft, but we came to the
> conclusion we will need them after the OAuth session at IETF 102.
> They will be in the next update)
> 
> Introspection endpoint paramenters from RFC  (OAuth 2.0 introspection)
(with
> proposed abbreviations):
> 
> iss 1
> sub 2
> aud 3
> exp 4
> iat 6
> nbf 5
> scope  9
> token_type 15
> active 20
> client_id 24
> username 33
> jti (no abbreviation, we have cti)
> 
> 
> 
> New introspection endpoint parameters introduced by
> draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz:
> 
> cnf 8
> rs_cnf   19
> profile  10
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Ludwig Seitz, PhD
> Security Lab, RISE SICS
> Phone +46(0)70-349 92 51
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ace mailing list
> Ace@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace