Re: [OAUTH-WG] Initial OAuth working group Discovery specification

John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> Tue, 09 February 2016 22:53 UTC

Return-Path: <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4506F1B2D60 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 14:53:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_27=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_92=0.6, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S4E5NlNFYMGC for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 14:52:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qg0-x235.google.com (mail-qg0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D58FA1ACDD1 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 14:52:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qg0-x235.google.com with SMTP id b67so1701204qgb.1 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 14:52:57 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ve7jtb-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=LtEAIkM62dzAJW7V9MsPcyJranVpr65vWULXVC41Cr4=; b=HG1xjeSanOiXF/XSVRIq79aRBau9828+gsMnL0OiklXBYRHtoON6rgZlUmAAoLXLDN NmzYNWlQpp/2SV5Mu6BVB0a6zMDwT2bkGT/rEZxsZMHR1Kf8Mp5fCh/8lFVhMreysuBf hjj3ZGx7G50EB9Pi8BQwhcUpNaU1/ihtJXbYXMjd+uI+PwqsURJOi2NbfWDbfXZbN2wa 6blMxVzlox9V6TXkCcYEuf4zKGzp27hn3BaeJyIceMFhwXHdFYGycLEK/MmSaIAy3DqG hGgiXqQnLJsn9IqRElvTQy1T9fsgD7AELxVqcTjFzjNgfiKoXUQjunflJgMxRAaRYWeI jNMw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=LtEAIkM62dzAJW7V9MsPcyJranVpr65vWULXVC41Cr4=; b=JziRHK5hDN2Iy7XYBdKayBFWH//TYB9ccC8Vr4yvSI3I9vjVD9G4SBxEWPaye+kwze LMdofjXHQkRCeDRPCzdb2oM0HyCs944/r0AUMyinRd5xo672P6uv7eNpVX7f+PjlVHjC OZ03FdP1NHBzoTJs9oRkGqIB3g6VaX4I5FLuk/RtVn0Ooj1R0Y91WMjV8TzSuy8a/wym 0Pt5AT2AO+Q8csrNDOmL0VJT7V6T3bYNgh2EfZA3P1pwsHV+AhhFxd/tItaAraqEn/Xf ITN20RjXFCchypxWI6mRUqsUPvYJ61TUpM0bU3b2Ol6k4f0t1N/T0UZ9hX/6edBGCcdx MKGw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQ4ZDHMvKsJt/WwqvUKGWI5NnZW8hYdaI4uWH7SB+yIJ+x0q/AOLz/CqYqsCBObhg==
X-Received: by 10.140.82.11 with SMTP id g11mr45710308qgd.77.1455058376965; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 14:52:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.8.100] ([181.202.64.23]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b201sm89102qhb.48.2016.02.09.14.52.54 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Feb 2016 14:52:56 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_38CA0FA8-74D6-424D-BFA6-98D2C135B63E"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\))
From: John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
In-Reply-To: <F0681C96-1AFA-472C-899F-3E6952292DAA@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 19:52:52 -0300
Message-Id: <F0E2E297-DDB0-4EF3-B31C-E9207E75EE5F@ve7jtb.com>
References: <BY2PR03MB4427E9DAFDE674F71F6074AF5D60@BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <F6DD25EE-8B49-45E4-BACC-872CA98F2D7B@mit.edu> <2CB5C3E1-BF3B-4766-8761-CAF54F3C5170@ve7jtb.com> <F0681C96-1AFA-472C-899F-3E6952292DAA@oracle.com>
To: "Phil Hunt (IDM)" <phil.hunt@oracle.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/381FntjdLaRfNIJIzlrZbcHdNNo>
Cc: "<oauth@ietf.org>" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Initial OAuth working group Discovery specification
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 22:53:01 -0000

You would define a rel uri for SCIM.   The SCIM entry can have sub properties if it supported more than one auth type,  or you could have a SCIM discovery document that the URI points to.

There are probably multiple ways to do it.

I don’t think trying to have a oauth rel and then sub types is going to make sense to developers.  It is also not a good fit for Webfinger.

I also suspect that SCIM is more naturally part of a authentication service It may be that the authentication service points at the SCIM service.

Remember that webfinger is a account alias and may not be the subject that the SP/RP knows the user as.

Each service will need to be thought through for webfinger as the account identity may mean different things depending on the protocol, and not every protocol needs per user discovery.

John B
> On Feb 9, 2016, at 7:39 PM, Phil Hunt (IDM) <phil.hunt@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Another example is to look at scim discovery(in contrast with connect).
> 
> When asked separately the answers may be different. 
> 
> Asking what is the oauth server for scim is yet another relation.  So may be we need a scheme for oauth where query is rs:someval and optionally an acnt value to. 
> 
> For example
> Get ./well-known/webfinger?rel=oauth&query=rs:scim&acnt:phunt@example.com <http://example.com/>
> 
> Note i probably have the compound query syntax wrong. 
> 
> Phil
> 
> On Feb 9, 2016, at 14:03, John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com <mailto:ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>> wrote:
> 
>> If we keep webfinger I don’t think that having a generic OAuth rel makes sense.   It should be up to each API/Protocol to define it’s own rel value like Connect has done.
>> 
>> It is not reasonable to think that a persons ID provider is going to be the same as the one for calendaring or photo sharing.
>> 
>> So I could go two ways with webfinger,  leave it out completely, or leave it in but make it up to the application to define a rel value.
>> I expect that some things using UMA in web-finger would point directly to the resource and the resource would point the client at the correct UMA server.
>> 
>> The config file name in .well-known could stay as openid-configuration for historical reasons or we could change it.
>> 
>> I think we first need to decide if every protocol/API is going to have its own config file, we are going to get apps to retrieve multiple files,  or everything is going to go into one config-file and applicatins just add to that?
>> 
>> I prefer not to change the file name if we are going for one config file, but if we do one alias/link is probably not the end of the world, as I doubt people will ever remove openid-configuration one if they have it now.
>> 
>> John B.
>> 
>>  
>>> On Feb 9, 2016, at 2:19 PM, Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu <mailto:jricher@mit.edu>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Mike, thanks for putting this up.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I would like to propose for two changes that have been brought up before:
>>> 
>>> 1) The wholesale removal of section 2, Webfinger lookup. 
>>> 
>>> 2) The changing of "/.well-known/openid-configuration” to "/.well-known/oauth-authorization-server” or something else not openid-related.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  — Justin
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Feb 9, 2016, at 9:09 AM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com <mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> We have created the initial working group version of OAuth Discovery based on draft-jones-oauth-discovery-01, with no normative changes.
>>>>  
>>>> The specification is available at:
>>>> ·       http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-discovery-00 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-discovery-00>
>>>>  
>>>> An HTML-formatted version is also available at:
>>>> ·       http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-discovery-00.html <http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-discovery-00.html>
>>>>  
>>>>                                                           -- Mike
>>>>  
>>>> P.S.  This notice was also posted at http://self-issued.info/?p=1534 <http://self-issued.info/?p=1534> and as @selfissued <https://twitter.com/selfissued>.
>>>>  
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OAuth mailing list
>>>> OAuth@ietf.org <mailto:OAuth@ietf.org>
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OAuth mailing list
>>> OAuth@ietf.org <mailto:OAuth@ietf.org>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list
>> OAuth@ietf.org <mailto:OAuth@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>