Return-Path: 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 B47323A69C3 for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 22:57:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -17.158 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.158 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.107, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_DEF_WHITELIST=-15] 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 CGrIrvke-geY for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 22:57:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mrout2-b.corp.re1.yahoo.com (mrout2-b.corp.re1.yahoo.com [69.147.107.21]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E61D3A6872 for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 22:57:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SNV-EXPF01.ds.corp.yahoo.com (snv-expf01.ds.corp.yahoo.com [207.126.227.250]) by mrout2-b.corp.re1.yahoo.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/y.out) with ESMTP id o6F5uh5x088305; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 22:56:43 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=serpent; d=yahoo-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=received:x-mimeole:content-class:mime-version: content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:message-id: in-reply-to:x-ms-has-attach:x-ms-tnef-correlator:thread-topic: thread-index:references:from:to:x-originalarrivaltime; b=Q6POhF2koQV64zul/qJrWWqDOXM0pDDS4gUA+ADs3OGe2UIXln64AsGV1v81FLdl Received: from SNV-EXVS08.ds.corp.yahoo.com ([207.126.227.8]) by SNV-EXPF01.ds.corp.yahoo.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 14 Jul 2010 22:56:42 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 22:51:03 -0700 Message-ID: <012AB2B223CB3F4BB846962876F47217059B6CB0@SNV-EXVS08.ds.corp.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth vs OAuth2 in Authorization header Thread-Index: Acsj4HAAyxAyb1p+TkCewvXCWFcpxwAARtzg References: From: "William Mills" To: "Brian Eaton" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jul 2010 05:56:42.0881 (UTC) FILETIME=[8017B710:01CB23E2] Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth vs OAuth2 in Authorization header X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: OAUTH WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 05:57:17 -0000 Token makes sense in the context of provisioning a more general token auth header which we overload on. That said I'm glad we're getting simpler. =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: oauth-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org]=20 > On Behalf Of Brian Eaton > Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 10:39 PM > To: oauth@ietf.org > Subject: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth vs OAuth2 in Authorization header >=20 > Draft 10 switched from "Token" scheme in the authorization=20 > header to "OAuth". I'd rather we didn't reuse OAuth. =20 > 'OAuth2' would be great. > "Token" is ugly as sin, but is better than "OAuth". >=20 > Spec section:=20 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-v2-10#page-30 >=20 > The problem with reusing "OAuth" is that there are existing=20 > implementations in the wild that have special behavior=20 > implemented for OAuth authorization headers. Since OAuth2=20 > headers don't have the same semantics, we're going to break=20 > those implementations. We shouldn't reuse "OAuth" for the=20 > same reasons we shouldn't reuse "Negotiate", "NTLM",=20 > "Digest", or "Basic. >=20 > Cheers, > Brian > _______________________________________________ > OAuth mailing list > OAuth@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth >=20