IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Issue: Scope parameter

Dick Hardt <dick.hardt@gmail.com> Mon, 19 April 2010 05:26 UTC

Return-Path: <dick.hardt@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 D9E3F3A69DE for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:26:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.365
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.365 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.234, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 c-EJIXDvyXSm for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:26:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gx0-f217.google.com (mail-gx0-f217.google.com [209.85.217.217]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC4B53A6A56 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:25:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gxk9 with SMTP id 9so2900327gxk.8 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:25:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:mime-version :content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding :message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=BVU3OaSEN2gEw3O6fX+WluDI4mrUahfFePHye50Wt0A=; b=ESZXVFQBTaPZrdxQIaUbt+Gna8Wbrq8o8K9+4iM71cVQngf7wER0jsI140tAMRM3PN avvk9oV7PY9wJCkyfpwmMHjILvvJKYsf2UBS9+//LU8OqF04gQyQPoT/r0TSr8oSAaiY 5s/vbY7nP1rg9u/+izR0mdE0+M6vFtKG82k2o=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=NAJXPgsXi8yU4fWb8XENmY1gcGB7GCPSfvWe6Z1fuw0qEM6mas49DtVtq5dHvlwtoQ kMxFwICdl6EaLbCtonRkx9PkXyRazAHyb2IrqBzAjm4RyaacIJ43v5z96z3bemmqoKxG 4Q6Rt9Qv23VAtyemOYPfquwUnAelwYFMVjSCQ=
Received: by 10.101.136.38 with SMTP id o38mr12882610ann.146.1271654745150; Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:25:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.4] (c-67-180-195-167.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.180.195.167]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 7sm1460281yxd.8.2010.04.18.22.25.42 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:25:43 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Dick Hardt <dick.hardt@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2513A610118CC14C8E622C376C8DEC93D54D66DDF6@SC-MBXC1.TheFacebook.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:25:40 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F3173570-96BE-4089-A48F-95976638E78E@gmail.com>
References: <C7ECB1F7.32357%eran@hueniverse.com> <h2l987bab591004181812ve43197f9la55f59b753bd2959@mail.gmail.com> <o2wfd6741651004181838ob1dda59bpf7cb88d3b1892c1d@mail.gmail.com> <1676FB17-48B2-4125-991C-CE996C4DE66B@gmail.com> <g2sfd6741651004181904q2f242fcexf2f7892c9b512068@mail.gmail.com> <z2o74caaad21004182112he72e1a33i4397e2d5333a0c13@mail.gmail.com> <2513A610118CC14C8E622C376C8DEC93D54D66DDF6@SC-MBXC1.TheFacebook.com>
To: Luke Shepard <lshepard@facebook.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078)
Cc: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Issue: Scope parameter
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: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 05:27:00 -0000

+1 to #1
On 2010-04-18, at 9:35 PM, Luke Shepard wrote:
> 
> 1/ We leave the scope parameter as an Auth Server-specific, opaque parameter.
> 2/ We all agree on a format and spec for the scope parameter.
> 3/ We drop the scope parameter and make each server define their own, non-standard scope param.
> 
> I think David proposed #2 as a way to address concerns on this list that #1 would be a hindrance to interop. But I personally vote for #1 now - we would add a spec later if it proves to be a problem.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email