IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WRAP

John Panzer <jpanzer@google.com> Tue, 10 November 2009 19:36 UTC

Return-Path: <jpanzer@google.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 713B828C215 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:36:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 Khr4WmJffhpv for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:36:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [216.239.45.13]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EBB128C21B for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:36:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wpaz21.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz21.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.85]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id nAAJabCw010872 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:36:37 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1257881797; bh=DGHwkKz8W32ZGw5i3hZvheoKGds=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=L9o4lbWHm4w+nr7pjtn2m/t6V+8yKHp1Q0dwK/K3No9+OEFEEQuwrS0p88oTvxmSA RrmFuJ27s+kST46MCZAYQ==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id: subject:to:cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=kCA/LzN6ja7pEOODrNQA3MOnQYtJ62behxRTb3uBfKGYtlPAS22fVt93LJF2QCrVL QuKiNE1x8rjRLMsv/nj7Q==
Received: from pzk3 (pzk3.prod.google.com [10.243.19.131]) by wpaz21.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id nAAJaXuX016004 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:36:34 -0800
Received: by pzk3 with SMTP id 3so212793pzk.20 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:36:33 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.114.252.2 with SMTP id z2mr890881wah.156.1257881793106; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:36:33 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1257876364.4540.265.camel@localhost>
References: <daf5b9570911082102u215dcf22gf0aeb2f3578e5ea0@mail.gmail.com> <35D50F5C-3982-4298-A9E0-86A528F5C5D3@jkemp.net> <daf5b9570911092158k682aff63l959c423c399b2277@mail.gmail.com> <B1B9E4FC-0AF5-4357-B06F-F533C84F3C7D@microsoft.com> <1257876364.4540.265.camel@localhost>
From: John Panzer <jpanzer@google.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:36:13 -0800
Message-ID: <cb5f7a380911101136l7e184535oe81d28b4faf64005@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Paul C. Bryan" <email@pbryan.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0016e68786457294250478096d93"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WRAP
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, 10 Nov 2009 19:36:11 -0000

My personal hope is that these can be merged, as they address nearly the
same use cases.  WRAP is described differently from OAuth but my
understanding is that it's possible do do a nearly 1:1 mapping between the
two by picking appropriate options in OAuth and perhaps defining some things
left undefined by the OAuth base spec.
--
John Panzer / Google
jpanzer@google.com / abstractioneer.org / @jpanzer



On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Paul C. Bryan <email@pbryan.net> wrote:

> Hi Dick:
>
> Given that WRAP is so different from OAuth (as I know it), other than
> the fact that OAuth could be used to negotiate the issuance of a WRAP
> refresh token, I'm curious why you chose to associate this with OAuth by
> giving it an "OAuth" prefix. It seems to me that it would only create
> confusion in this space.
>
> Paul
>
> On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 17:52 +0000, Dick Hardt wrote:
> > At IIW last week, myself, Biran Eaton from Google and Allen Tom from
> > Yahoo! presented what is now called OAuth WRAP
> >
> > The specs and discussion specific to those documents is at:
> >
> >       http://groups.google.com/group/oauth-wrap-wg
> >
> > We plan to submit the document as an I-D next week when I-D submission
> > is open again, and for further work to occur in the IETF OAuth WG.
> >
> > -- Dick
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email