IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Issue: 'username' parameter proposal

Eve Maler <eve@xmlgrrl.com> Thu, 22 April 2010 01:35 UTC

Return-Path: <eve@xmlgrrl.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F5FD3A69A8 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:35:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.608
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.608 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_50=0.001, FROM_DOMAIN_NOVOWEL=0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SARE_URI_CONS7=0.306, URI_NOVOWEL=0.5]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fNaWFHpzbWlm for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:35:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.promanage-inc.com (eliasisrael.com [98.111.84.13]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D4D03A6920 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:35:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.168.198] ([192.168.168.198]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.promanage-inc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o3M1ZJdJ018503 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:35:20 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-685--612340042"
From: Eve Maler <eve@xmlgrrl.com>
In-Reply-To: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723438E5C7FAA5@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:35:19 -0700
Message-Id: <C93BAEA7-35BD-4ED7-AA1E-583C9DD6C785@xmlgrrl.com>
References: <r2pc8689b661004190833tf46085bayb92b840acf080bb4@mail.gmail.com> <C7F1C6AC.327EE%eran@hueniverse.com> <u2jc8689b661004191006hc3c7fb3eid09feafd57d2fd8a@mail.gmail.com> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723438E5C7F163@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <o2wc8689b661004191716o69966d5di900c07737d3be568@mail.gmail.com> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723438E5C7F45A@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <z2xc334d54e1004200936s57f06dedt8e0e46df3480f8d4@mail.gmail.com> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723438E5C7F533@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <4BCDF86C.9080003@lodderstedt.net> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723438E5C7F5D9@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <4BCF6E8F.6080802@lodderstedt.net> <9454D8CD-0BF4-44CA-A46A-12F244E72B22@xmlgrrl.com> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723438E5C7FAA5@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078)
Cc: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Issue: 'username' parameter proposal
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 01:35:38 -0000

Thanks!

On 21 Apr 2010, at 5:12 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:

> This is part of the delegation flows so username should be just fine…
>  
> EHL
>  
> From: oauth-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Eve Maler
> Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 4:43 PM
> To: OAuth WG
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Issue: 'username' parameter proposal
>  
> Tacking this response to the end of the thread for lack of a better place to do it: The name "username" seems not quite apt in the case of an autonomous client that isn't representing an end-user. Would "identifier" be better? (Actually, it sort of reminds me of SAML's "SessionIndex"...) Or would the parameter be reserved for user-delegation flows?
>  
> Speaking of autonomous clients, Section 2.2 -- among possibly other places -- states that an autonomous client is also the resource owner, but that's not always the case, is it? The client might be seeking access on behalf of itself. (FWIW, I made roughly this same comment on David's first draft on March 21, and he agreed with my suggested fix at the time.)
>  
>           Eve
>  


Eve Maler
eve@xmlgrrl.com
http://www.xmlgrrl.com/blog

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email