Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expires_in
Eran Hammer <eran@hueniverse.com> Tue, 17 January 2012 07:20 UTC
Return-Path: <eran@hueniverse.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F56821F85CE for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 23:20:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.076, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 74x0CW4+wwo9 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 23:20:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p3plex1out01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plex1out01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [72.167.180.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 26BBC21F8598 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 23:20:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 8997 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2012 07:20:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.ex1.secureserver.net) (72.167.180.20) by p3plex1out01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with SMTP; 17 Jan 2012 07:19:59 -0000
Received: from P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET ([10.6.135.20]) by P3PW5EX1HT002.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET ([72.167.180.20]) with mapi; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 00:19:59 -0700
From: Eran Hammer <eran@hueniverse.com>
To: Aaron Parecki <aaron@parecki.com>, OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 00:19:54 -0700
Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expires_in
Thread-Index: AczU5raFa8mUsTtlS7SDZ/Iw8bxoUQAAa+gg
Message-ID: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723453A754C5B6@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
References: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723453A754C549@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <E4309A9E-9BC7-4547-918A-224B6233B25C@mitre.org> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723453A754C5B1@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <CAGBSGjoajjjf+PaFE_byDxu-E4DOdhn+tPLCQVy-w1XZS878ZQ@mail.gmail.com> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723453A754C5B3@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <CAGBSGjr3RbxA-CyUqBunN67zAyddLxTLbOe6Bj10eGMSRc_NUA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGBSGjr3RbxA-CyUqBunN67zAyddLxTLbOe6Bj10eGMSRc_NUA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723453A754C5B6P3PW5EX1MB01E_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "wolter.eldering" <wolter.eldering@enovation.com.cn>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expires_in
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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, 17 Jan 2012 07:20:02 -0000
WFM. From: Aaron Parecki [mailto:aaron@parecki.com] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 11:08 PM To: OAuth WG Cc: Eran Hammer; Richer, Justin P.; wolter.eldering Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expires_in Actually now I'm having second thoughts about making expires_in RECOMMENDED. Here's another attempt at a clarification: expires_in OPTIONAL. The lifetime in seconds of the access token. For example, the value "3600" denotes that the access token will expire in one hour from the time the response was generated. If omitted, the authorization server SHOULD document the default expiration time or indicate that the token will not expire until explicitly revoked. -aaronpk On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Eran Hammer <eran@hueniverse.com<mailto:eran@hueniverse.com>> wrote: Hmm. This might become too much work at this stage… Happy for suggestions but I won’t pursue it on my own for now. EHL From: Aaron Parecki [mailto:aaron@parecki.com<mailto:aaron@parecki.com>] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 10:36 PM To: OAuth WG Cc: Richer, Justin P.; wolter.eldering; Eran Hammer Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expires_in That seems like a good idea, but then it should also be explicitly stated what to do if the server issues non-expiring tokens. aaronpk On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Eran Hammer <eran@hueniverse.com<mailto:eran@hueniverse.com>> wrote: How do you feel about changing expires_in from OPTIONAL to RECOMMENDED? EHL > -----Original Message----- > From: Richer, Justin P. [mailto:jricher@mitre.org<mailto:jricher@mitre.org>] > Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 7:29 PM > To: Eran Hammer > Cc: OAuth WG; wolter.eldering > Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expires_in > > I think #3. > > #1 will be a common instance, and #2 (or its variant, a limited number of > uses) is a different expiration pattern than time that would want to have its > own expiration parameter name. I haven't seen enough concrete use of this > pattern to warrant its own extension though. > > Which is why I vote #3 - it's a configuration issue. Perhaps we should rather > say that the AS "SHOULD document the token behavior in the absence of this > parameter, which may include the token not expiring until explicitly revoked, > expiring after a set number of uses, or other expiration behavior." That's a lot > of words here though. > > -- Justin > > On Jan 16, 2012, at 1:53 PM, Eran Hammer wrote: > > > A question came up about the access token expiration when expires_in is > not included in the response. This should probably be made clearer in the > spec. The three options are: > > > > 1. Does not expire (but can be revoked) 2. Single use token 3. > > Defaults to whatever the authorization server decides and until > > revoked > > > > #3 is the assumed answer given the WG history. I'll note that in the spec, > but wanted to make sure this is the explicit WG consensus. > > > > EHL > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OAuth mailing list > > OAuth@ietf.org<mailto:OAuth@ietf.org> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org<mailto:OAuth@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
- [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expires_… Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Richer, Justin P.
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Aaron Parecki
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Aaron Parecki
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Mike Jones
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Mike Jones
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… John Bradley
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Paul Madsen
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Richer, Justin P.
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Paul Madsen
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… William Mills
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… William Mills
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Richer, Justin P.
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Paul Madsen
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Paul Madsen
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Richer, Justin P.
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Richer, Justin P.
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… William Mills
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Paul Madsen
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Access Token Response without expi… Justin Richer