Re: [apps-discuss] Reserved URI query parameter in draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer

[Ned Freed <[e-mail]>]

> On 12/04/2012, at 4:15 PM, Ned Freed wrote:
> >
> > Pete, I think the issue is moot at this point. A quick google search clearly
> > shows that this stuff is already deployed by multiple vendors, including use of
> > access_token. As such, it is effectively impossible to change it at this point.
> >
> > I have to say I would have a lot more comfortable with a name like
> > oauth_access_token that removes the possibility of conflict with other uses,
> > but at this point it's a "grin and bear it" situation AFAICT.

> I would still like to see us do the right thing by the W3C, and I don't see
> why the IESG can't insert language that cautions against this (as well as
> future things like it).

I certainly don't object to doing that. In fact I don't object to dropping this
nasty hack from the document, although perhaps documenting it as *not*
standardized and explaining why it sucks would be even better.

But I also think that believing this will prevent or even significantly limit
it's use is probably unrealistic given how far it deployment appears to have
gotten.

				Ned