Re: [OAUTH-WG] Should registration request be form-urlencoded or JSON?

Dale is correct, I was misremembering slightly -- UAA does not do what 
we would really call dynamic registration with SCIM, but rather does a 
static client provisioning using SCIM as the API for provisioning the 
client objects. Still, it's a real-life implementation of something 
similar that we can look at.

  -- Justin

On 02/05/2013 02:42 AM, Dale Olds wrote:
> Rather surprised (and pleased) to see a reference to the UAA here, but 
> I would like to make a quick clarification.
>
> Justin, I think we concluded that what the UAA is doing is static 
> client registration via SCIM extensions, not dynamic client 
> registrations. The UAA has been serving OAuth2 and SCIM requests in 
> the cloudfoundry.com PaaS for over a year now -- there was no client 
> registration standard at that time, and SCIM provides what we need.
>
> I agree with your point that we should not invent unnecessary 
> standards, and SCIM is working quite well for us in combination with 
> OAuth2 for static client registrations. That said, I expect we will 
> have a future need for dynamic client registrations and that there may 
> be some significant differences.
>
> And my preference would also be json in and json out.
>
> --Dale
>
> On 02/04/2013 01:35 PM, Richer, Justin P. wrote:
>> Additionally:
>>
>> This begs the question, why not just do SCIM here? CloudFoundry's UAA 
>> has a SCIM class for OAuth clients that they use for dynamic 
>> registration today.
>>
>>  -- Justin
>>
>>
>> On Feb 4, 2013, at 4:25 PM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com 
>> <mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>>
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Now that we're returning the registration state as JSON, it's pretty 
>>> inconsistent for the registration request to instead be 
>>> form-url-encoded. The case can be made for switching to JSON now - 
>>> especially in light of possibly wanting to convey some structured 
>>> information at registration time.
>>> I realize that this is a big change, but if we're going to do it, we 
>>> should do it now.
>>> As a precedent, apparently SCIM requests are JSON, rather than 
>>> form-url-encoded.
>>> -- Mike
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OAuth mailing list
>>> OAuth@ietf.org <mailto:OAuth@ietf.org>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list
>> OAuth@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth