IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Remarks for draft-wmills-oauth-lrdd-07

algermissen1971 <algermissen1971@me.com> Wed, 20 March 2013 09:29 UTC

Return-Path: <algermissen1971@me.com>
X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72DD521F8514 for <link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 02:29:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6gPkzbc10Kky for <link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 02:29:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nk11p03mm-asmtp001.mac.com (nk11p03mm-asmtp001.mac.com [17.158.232.236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B970A21F83EF for <link-relations@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 02:29:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.90.134.89] ([87.253.171.216]) by nk11p03mm-asmtp001.mac.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-26.01(7.0.4.26.0) 64bit (built Jul 13 2012)) with ESMTPSA id <0MJY00FNDD121O10@nk11p03mm-asmtp001.mac.com> for link-relations@ietf.org; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 09:29:28 +0000 (GMT)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8626, 1.0.431, 0.0.0000 definitions=2013-03-20_03:2013-03-19, 2013-03-20, 1970-01-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=6.0.2-1302030000 definitions=main-1303200031
Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
Subject: Re: Remarks for draft-wmills-oauth-lrdd-07
From: algermissen1971 <algermissen1971@me.com>
In-reply-to: <1361266245.51526.YahooMailNeo@web31805.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 10:29:27 +0100
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Message-id: <79DBDFCB-73D3-452D-B5AA-7E627819F510@me.com>
References: <BA403B1A-63A6-4287-9F42-B3835B463282@me.com> <1361266245.51526.YahooMailNeo@web31805.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
To: William Mills <wmills_92105@yahoo.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499)
Cc: link-relations <link-relations@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <link-relations.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/link-relations>
List-Post: <mailto:link-relations@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 09:29:39 -0000

Hi Bill,

On 19.02.2013, at 10:30, William Mills <wmills_92105@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I agree that they overlap.  I'm open to any clear way to represent this, I chose not to go with a "version" link extension, since it's incrementally (by that infinitesimal calculus dx) more complicated and it then requires a registry of constants.
> 

Sorry to be a bit late.

After trying, I find no way to propose anything that is better than to simply enumerate the endpoints as you did.

I still do not like the overlap, but the problem is much more inherent in the way that OAuth 1 and 2 (not) approach discovery and avoid making use of hypermedia, IMHO. But thats all done now.

Hence,  from my POV, the I-D is good to go.

Jan






> Discussion is forward progress, so I'm happy.
> 
> -bill
> 
> From: algermissen1971 <algermissen1971@me.com>
> To: "wmills_92105@yahoo.com" <wmills_92105@yahoo.com> 
> Cc: link-relations <link-relations@ietf.org> 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:01 AM
> Subject: Remarks for draft-wmills-oauth-lrdd-07
> 
> William,
> 
> thanks for incorporating the changes[1].
> 
> Persionally, I am always trying to avoid semantic overlap between specs and with that hat on, I still have problems with the various link relations being tied to specific OAuth versions.
> 
> I'll go through the specific definitions again over the next days to see if I can sustain my point that, at least for some of them, the specific OAuth version does not matter but is rather a runtime capability negotiation issue.
> 
> Please bear with me :-)
> 
> Jan
> 
> [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-wmills-oauth-lrdd-07
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email