IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Proposed resolution for issue 26

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Wed, 28 September 2011 13:43 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F1A421F8CEA for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 06:43:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.368
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.368 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.769, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 rsVZPH3igjkZ for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 06:43:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 2AF6A21F8CE8 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 06:43:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 28 Sep 2011 13:46:24 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp059) with SMTP; 28 Sep 2011 15:46:24 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX198lbFkz7J8oZcmiUqUH8OExqO77bPZ8o873o27bS 2sviYsTT1ES0hL
Message-ID: <4E83252F.40308@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:46:23 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110922 Thunderbird/7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
References: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739435C1FC6A1@TK5EX14MBXC285.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <CAC4RtVDOPaMif55L6JAU4C8aERHgt6M0ntet7GKwgQJbUQKMZw@mail.gmail.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739435C2148B5@TK5EX14MBXC285.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E1128FF826E5@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com> <CAC4RtVAj7UG-7kgo3CU5Q6eeJFXi2VciQHUoGL5WJ8iq5cmykg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVAj7UG-7kgo3CU5Q6eeJFXi2VciQHUoGL5WJ8iq5cmykg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Proposed resolution for issue 26
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 13:43:42 -0000

On 2011-09-28 15:40, Barry Leiba wrote:
> I'd like to see more participation in this thread, besides just from
> Mike and James.  What do others think?
>
> Barry, as chair
> ...

I agree that if a protocol element needs to support non-ASCII 
characters, the spec should be *crystal clear* how it's going to be 
transported over the wire.

Note that before James' mail I wasn't even beware that the same the 
problem I noticed for error_description also affects much more relevant 
protocol elements.

With my HTTPbis-editor hat on:

- use a consistent way of encoding in all parts of the header fields,

- and try to avoid raw UTF-8. There are alternatives, such as applying 
another round of percent-encoding, or using RFC 5987 encoding in the 
first place.

Finally, what's best in other wire formats may not be the best in header 
fields; insisting to use the same encoding will cause pain.

Best regards, Julian

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status