IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 Mobile WebApp Flow

Nat Sakimura <sakimura@gmail.com> Tue, 08 June 2010 02:53 UTC

Return-Path: <sakimura@gmail.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 F15A03A67E9 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 19:53:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.299, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 JxD-zh4JWtX7 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 19:53:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE8C23A67ED for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 19:53:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iwn42 with SMTP id 42so4138924iwn.31 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 19:53:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=SfFySIW7jmJif55WFUxCMUWW22hIpWZGmOv3v2uwmXA=; b=OoF1UZjRWWrfKfSwvDBYyz1WWlMDi7hTa/qz6fBGedoSTzdtG50TWQ3cmc7mpgqvVf Y2nHjKwifBqgqBQ4XaUL6V1MZcJSgeFXt+h5/9QshPXKmyDmNIo54vW/3Kf5PH1pn5TH VnDnscxwWGPnzfZyEn/UL43ocnNweGp6GVqco=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=JHF7S5vlUi4/RrAXfWz4q0yPwpKHWRKpX4SFht33VZLSrWbIfwYj8t/eXJpA3CptO1 qLlheSd3GaXrvVkqJpEQ+lbSzBcOqGJhhROBVmdHznt4zLMXitDAO9dnQXxe8OSm+P4h ZLQShLjnEx84J5v+WU5o/Oi8rVoYEVdRf3tAg=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.130.137 with SMTP id t9mr5521656ibs.142.1275965615136; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 19:53:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.231.15.133 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 19:53:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E11262FEE7D8@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com>
References: <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E11262FEE7D8@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 11:53:34 +0900
Message-ID: <AANLkTimIXMReEaB3ShbZIjWjiBH-VUjrvHgKHCzgVOu0@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nat Sakimura <sakimura@gmail.com>
To: "Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001485f9a7043c60e704887be59b"
Cc: oauth <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 Mobile WebApp Flow
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, 08 Jun 2010 02:53:38 -0000

I fully agree on it.

Instead of doing as a flow, defining request_url as one of the core variable
would be better.
The question then is, whether this community accepts the idea.

On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Manger, James H <
James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com> wrote:

> Nat,
>
> > On the other hand, you are starting to think of it as a generic "include"
> mechanism, are you?
>
> Yes. That feels like the simplest mental model for this functionality, and
> the simplest way to specify it.
>
> --
> James Manger
>



-- 
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
http://www.sakimura.org/en/
http://twitter.com/_nat_en

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email