IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] more than one assertion?

Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com> Thu, 12 August 2010 19:37 UTC

Return-Path: <beaton@google.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 211F13A6A09 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:37:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.083
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.083 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.894, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 AOGsQDFMjuch for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:37:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [74.125.121.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F49B3A69DB for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:37:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hpaq5.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq5.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.5]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o7CJcEQU011994 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:38:14 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1281641894; bh=ouG8Y4BV8F3CTEIojpUQNsbYbiE=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=VfSzIcTE1PVGQQ1Ngm3adiWhNr8xvnNKba94Lfk42d7L1fk1XwMwLdC7XGjcccyQG 5/dSDXWVwAXEDZdU3tZ3Q==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=Apkq7UwtigcUOwUqDUx8AlGazSSMoVNa7xm2sKQ58xskx7ZFasu1yQQ3betsbFSFu iFLmnCOHliPJQiyjbasiw==
Received: from pzk6 (pzk6.prod.google.com [10.243.19.134]) by hpaq5.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o7CJbe8L015133 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:38:13 -0700
Received: by pzk6 with SMTP id 6so539205pzk.3 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:38:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.148.2 with SMTP id v2mr453285wfd.115.1281641892812; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:38:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.143.46.3 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:38:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinbmx+CBJdMrf5vBuV7wqLwWDLP3vA1N2HcUMHL@mail.gmail.com>
References: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343B3F124503@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <C8897C4C.B75E%cmortimore@salesforce.com> <AANLkTinbmx+CBJdMrf5vBuV7wqLwWDLP3vA1N2HcUMHL@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:38:12 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTinsTe9vxrWsXK6p9+bfRRSyZTjb2yW8+=ux5tU_@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com>
To: David Recordon <recordond@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: oauth <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] more than one assertion?
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, 12 Aug 2010 19:37:39 -0000

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:36 PM, David Recordon <recordond@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've only been half following the recent assertion threads for this
> exact reason. I don't understand how these proposals are going to be
> used and worry about any additional complexity added to the spec.

Likewise.

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status