Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when requesting an access token
Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com> Tue, 21 September 2010 21:11 UTC
Return-Path: <bcampbell@pingidentity.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 C8E7A3A6886 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:11:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.847
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.847 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.130, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 C4TV2r8RAxWl for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:11:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na3sys009aog113.obsmtp.com (na3sys009aog113.obsmtp.com [74.125.149.209]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 6B1663A69D6 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:11:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from source ([209.85.161.41]) by na3sys009aob113.postini.com ([74.125.148.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTJkfkbrKzhBTPce70aR3Qejqhm2upGdN@postini.com; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:11:48 PDT
Received: by mail-fx0-f41.google.com with SMTP id 10so485316fxm.28 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:11:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.223.121.136 with SMTP id h8mr5858907far.1.1285103505167; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:11:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.113.3 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:11:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343B3F35BE2D@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
References: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343B3F35BE13@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <1283462840.3809.42.camel@localhost.localdomain> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343B3F35BE2D@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
From: Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:11:15 -0600
Message-ID: <AANLkTinvch2Xc+LzMzVjQGjMx0yXHKheR=93D5ExJhzC@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when requesting an access token
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: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 21:11:37 -0000
Following from that (Justin: "url-defined grant type can also legally add and remove parameters from the endpoint, right?" / Eran: "Yes") does the assertion parameter still make sense to have in the core spec? I had sort of assumed that it would be going away in favor of whatever parameters any url-defined grant type would deem necessary. However, Eran's "working copy" of draft -11 as of 2010-09-03 still has the assertion parameter. Is that area still being worked on or was the intent to leave the parameter in for -11? On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com> wrote: > Yes. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Justin Richer [mailto:jricher@mitre.org] > Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 2:27 PM > To: Eran Hammer-Lahav > Cc: OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org) > Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when requesting an access token > > +1 > > I've never liked the notion of not being able to extend the "grant type" > field, and this change addresses that particular gripe. > > Just so I'm clear here: an extension that defines its own url-defined grant type can also legally add and remove parameters from the endpoint, right? > > -- Justin > > On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 17:11 -0400, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote: >> I would like to make this change in -11: >> >> >> >> Instead of the current user of the ‘assertion’ grant type – >> >> >> >> POST /token HTTP/1.1 >> >> Host: server.example.com >> >> Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded >> >> >> >> grant_type=assertion& >> >> assertion_type=urn%3Aoasis%3Anames%3Atc%3ASAML%3A2.0%3Aassertion& >> >> assertion=PHNhbWxwOl[...omitted for brevity...]ZT4%3D >> >> >> >> Drop the ‘assertion’ grant type and put the assertion type directly in >> the grant_type parameter: >> >> >> >> POST /token HTTP/1.1 >> >> Host: server.example.com >> >> Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded >> >> >> >> grant_type=urn%3Aoasis%3Anames%3Atc%3ASAML%3A2.0%3Aassertion& >> >> assertion=PHNhbWxwOl[...omitted for brevity...]ZT4%3D >> >> >> >> In other words, the grant_type parameter value will be defined as: >> >> >> >> - authorization_code >> >> - password >> >> - client_credentials >> >> - refresh_token >> >> - an abolute URI (extensions) >> >> >> >> I considered turning all the values into URIs but found it to be >> counter-intuitive. The practice of using “official” short names and >> extension URIs is well established and is already the general >> architecture used here. This just makes it cleaner. >> >> >> >> I ran this idea by Brian Campbell and Chuck Mortimore who are >> generally supportive of the idea. >> >> >> >> Any objections? >> >> >> >> EHL >> >> >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > OAuth mailing list > OAuth@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth >
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… Justin Richer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when req… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… David Recordon
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… David Waite
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… David Recordon
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… Justin Richer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… Marius Scurtescu
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when… Brian Campbell