Re: [OAUTH-WG] draft-ietf-oauth-revocation

"Richer, Justin P." <jricher@mitre.org> Mon, 04 February 2013 20:41 UTC

Return-Path: <jricher@mitre.org>
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 DF5E021F8ACE for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 12:41:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.558
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.558 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.041, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dMAWA-7dCq+F for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 12:41:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpksrv1.mitre.org (smtpksrv1.mitre.org [198.49.146.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5088E21F8AB6 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 12:41:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpksrv1.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id A221353110C1; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 15:41:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from IMCCAS02.MITRE.ORG (imccas02.mitre.org [129.83.29.79]) by smtpksrv1.mitre.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97F3D1F0B4B; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 15:41:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from IMCMBX01.MITRE.ORG ([169.254.1.25]) by IMCCAS02.MITRE.ORG ([129.83.29.69]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 15:41:50 -0500
From: "Richer, Justin P." <jricher@mitre.org>
To: Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net>
Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] draft-ietf-oauth-revocation
Thread-Index: AQHOAg6vIhUkwEc0U0KvYyCodlh1/Jhqf9CA
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 20:41:49 +0000
Message-ID: <B33BFB58CCC8BE4998958016839DE27E06886427@IMCMBX01.MITRE.ORG>
References: <510E5FB5.10803@lodderstedt.net>
In-Reply-To: <510E5FB5.10803@lodderstedt.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [172.31.48.118]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <7CDA51F8899AA8459F1EC6685519BF1A@imc.mitre.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] draft-ietf-oauth-revocation
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: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:41:52 -0000

On Feb 3, 2013, at 8:01 AM, Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> before I publish a new revision of the draft, I would like to sort out the following issues and would like to ask you for your feedback.
> 
> - Authorization vs. access grant vs. authorization grant: I propose to use "authorization grant".

+1 to authorization grant

> - invalid_token error code: I propose to use the new error code "invalid_parameter" (as suggested by Peter and George). I don't see the need to register it (see http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg10604.html) but would like to get your advice.

something more like "invalid_token_parameter" would maybe make sense, since it's not just *any* parameter, it's the special "token" parameter that we're talking about, but it's distinct from the invalid_token response. The introspection endpoint uses the same pattern of a token= parameter, but since the whole point of the introspection endpoint is determining token validity it doesn't actually throw an error here. 

I agree that it doesn't need to be registered (since it's on a different endpoint).

> - Donald F. Coffin raised the need for a token_type parameter to the revocation request. Shall we re-consider this topic?
> 

Only if it's optional, and informational from the client's behalf. Would you define "access" and "refresh" values here, with a means for other specs (like OIDC) to put in their own values (like "id_token")?

 -- Justin

> best regards,
> Torsten.
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth