Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Conference Call: Thu 22 Aug, 2pm PDT

I think we should start by reviewing use cases taxonomy. 

Then a discussion on any client_id assumptions and actual requirements for each client case. Why is registration needed for each case?

The statement can solve some complication but should be put in context of use cases. 

Phil

On 2013-08-18, at 15:01, Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> 
> - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> 
> Based on your feedback via the poll let us start with August 22nd with the first conference call. I will distribute the conference call details on Tuesday. 
> 
> Let us talk about the agenda. There were several items brought up in discussions, namely 
> 
> * Software assertions / software statements
> 
> We briefly discussed this topic at the IETF OAuth session but we may need more time to understand the implications for the current dynamic client registration document: 
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-oauth-2.pptx
> 
> * SCIM vs. current dynamic client registration approach for interacting with the client configuration endpoint
> 
> In the past we said that it would be fine to have a profile defined in SCIM to provide the dynamic client registration for those who implement SCIM and want to manage clients also using SCIM. It might, however, be useful to compare the two approaches in detail to see what the differences are. 
> 
> * Interactions with the client registration endpoint 
> 
> Justin added some "life cycle" description to the document to motivate some of the design decisions. Maybe we need to discuss those in more detail and add further text. 
> Additional text could come from the NIST Blue Button / Green Button usage. 
> 
> * Aspects that allow servers to store less / no state
> 
> - - From the discussions on the list it was not clear whether this is actually accomplishable with the current version of OAuth. We could explore this new requirement and try to get a better understanding how much this relates to dynamic client registration and to what extend it requires changes to the core spec. 
> 
> 
> What would you like to start with? Other topics you would like to bring up? 
> - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin)
> Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
> 
> iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJSEULvAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtttEH/Aogg8Q/R/L9/mzU05IQbnze
> AdXB1ZvySkV3jZT4I5shmP7hQr6mc6P6UdvyOrSjrvPlBHen55/oa5z7Cwchd1dk
> dcDUEavbodjnm9SrOs0nKaTvdeZimFSBkGMrfhoTYLXpymP24F9PZgwUXdOcFocF
> OiCs3qDajYaA395DCg5+4mOLQQgDnmy4drlgj2NPv1nMBRDBubzgAhJccwF2BLN9
> IW7MAwTEu7vYT/gwIFzriPkui7gYpf8sAqsnzf/z7FtXbsP8imgOKUlQxzZzeSSP
> QEb6+syyMD9Gt6wxQfWzyl5T0bYLP6DQ+ldZR8yGKCwb+2k3LN6Q8bIpj4mIERI=
> =tkGT
> - -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin)
> Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
> 
> iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJSEUQfAAoJEGhJURNOOiAt8wkIAI3xgdsWuOB36KLiMLRUG+Zb
> RvYqV+rOH80m7YVJcdOLjQJcpPqOIBdzq/yuNiAaF1uFJCqBn97ZQ/NLXLNGcg8x
> wI/Laz7kP2U4B2trBTMtAf2wsY9uYw4Eh+eOEDKGF6cmkEzrzrlw4q/Sfu6vy181
> VI+kqwzZ+iYX4iL3NYPlkg3rwF4OZ1v3T08Erg2SPrbmNd1TRfJJU8HrYFEJQo1q
> p0RiLjcFFDCEZs0gDr9zliCXllV7J9h2ttqLq8+xwPATDuO6buQdFS9vZQ8t1u36
> a0FIuy3NM8PQbblC3B5WumUjW4kntLV09ytYV8h6S8C/dgFwMqzAwEAeNx1exyE=
> =3qNI
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth