Re: [OAUTH-WG] VOTE: Token type response parameter

Todd W Lainhart <lainhart@us.ibm.com> Thu, 18 November 2010 16:16 UTC

Return-Path: <lainhart@us.ibm.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 B3DCF3A6884; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 08:16:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 teGLlmeA-w5M; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 08:16:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from e7.ny.us.ibm.com (e7.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.137]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 289D13A6879; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 08:16:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from d01relay05.pok.ibm.com (d01relay05.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.237]) by e7.ny.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id oAIG0WCb001100; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:00:32 -0500
Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.216]) by d01relay05.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id oAIGHOsm124514; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:17:24 -0500
Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id oAIGHOdp009444; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:17:24 -0200
Received: from d01ml255.pok.ibm.com (d01ml255.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.128]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id oAIGHNSD009429; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:17:23 -0200
In-Reply-To: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343D4AE3A525@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
References: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343D470CC778@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343D4AE3A525@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
To: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Cc: oauth-bounces@ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-KeepSent: AFED3135:A5230486-852577DF:005974A1; type=4; name=$KeepSent
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.0.2 HF88 September 24, 2008
From: Todd W Lainhart <lainhart@us.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <OFAFED3135.A5230486-ON852577DF.005974A1-852577DF.00597B7C@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:17:22 -0500
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01ML255/01/M/IBM(Release 8.5.1FP2|March 17, 2010) at 11/18/2010 11:17:22, Serialize complete at 11/18/2010 11:17:22
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 00597B25852577DF_="
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] VOTE: Token type response 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: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 16:16:42 -0000

#3




Todd Lainhart
Rational software
IBM Corporation
550 King Street, Littleton, MA 01460-1250
1-978-899-4705
2-276-4705 (T/L)
lainhart@us.ibm.com




From:
Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
To:
OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Date:
11/18/2010 02:50 AM
Subject:
Re: [OAUTH-WG] VOTE: Token type response parameter
Sent by:
oauth-bounces@ietf.org



Nothing? No one cares?

EHL

> -----Original Message-----
> From: oauth-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Eran Hammer-Lahav
> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 5:33 PM
> To: OAuth WG
> Subject: [OAUTH-WG] VOTE: Token type response parameter
> 
> The new draft will include a new token_type response parameter. In my
> original proposal I suggested making this an optional response parameter
> with a default value of 'bearer' or 'plain' to keep existing -10 
implementation
> compliant with -11.
> 
> Options are:
> 
> 1. Missing type response parameter means bearer token 2. Missing type
> response parameter means whatever the service default token type is 3.
> Servers must include an explicit token type with each response, where 
each
> token spec (bearer, signed, etc.) register their own type name 4. No 
token
> type. Type is determined by other attributes (such as secret and hash
> algorithm name).
> 
> #1 and #3 are the most consistent with current design and best for 
interop.
> #1 requires no changes to -10 code, but leads to ugly spec organization 
(it
> links the bearer token spec with the framework spec).
> 
> I'm strongly in favor of #3 as existing clients will ignore this and 
just assume
> bearer. Any server introducing a new token type will need to change 
clients
> anyway. Servers will need to be changed to add the new parameter but
> that's a trivial change (and -11 includes some normative changes already 
- all
> minor).
> 
> So +1 on #3 for me.
> 
> Please register your preference.
> 
> EHL
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth