IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Better title for OAuth 2.0 JWT Authorization Request

<Axel.Nennker@telekom.de> Fri, 09 October 2015 07:19 UTC

Return-Path: <Axel.Nennker@telekom.de>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01D3F1A6F12 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 00:19:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.859
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.859 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9o4FN3Wq3Xcm for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 00:19:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tcmail23.telekom.de (tcmail23.telekom.de [80.149.113.243]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8F3A1A6F10 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 00:19:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from s4de8nsazdfe010.bmbg.telekom.de ([10.175.246.202]) by tcmail21.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA; 09 Oct 2015 09:18:46 +0200
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,657,1437429600"; d="scan'208,217";a="754290646"
Received: from he101251.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.125.92.154]) by q4de8nsa015.bmbg.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 09 Oct 2015 09:15:24 +0200
Received: from HE101454.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.125.92.150]) by HE101251.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([fe80::e428:2144:dcc5:bcce%14]) with mapi; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 09:15:24 +0200
From: Axel.Nennker@telekom.de
To: jim@manicode.com, n-sakimura@nri.co.jp
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 09:15:23 +0200
Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] Better title for OAuth 2.0 JWT Authorization Request
Thread-Index: AdECNHXEkBX0n3Y7QQWydRj9jtYlaAAK/cBw
Message-ID: <7B1E2B3A05FF2341B03CE0320754230724FFB42209@HE101454.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
References: <00c001d10233$debc8720$9c359560$@nri.co.jp> <8BA8D241-67FF-4DD2-AA01-DF007D8916B0@manicode.com>
In-Reply-To: <8BA8D241-67FF-4DD2-AA01-DF007D8916B0@manicode.com>
Accept-Language: de-DE
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: de-DE
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7B1E2B3A05FF2341B03CE0320754230724FFB42209HE101454emea1_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/RLAHTG1aiIgWjsWj09dY29TCfTM>
Cc: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Better title for OAuth 2.0 JWT Authorization Request
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 07:19:56 -0000

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6749#section-4.1.1 Authorization Request is explicit too.

Naming could be about the why or the what. JAR is in the what-is-is category.
“Signed and Encrypted Authorization Request” would be more in the why category.

I think JAR is not bad.

-A

From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jim Manico
Sent: Freitag, 9. Oktober 2015 03:47
To: Nat Sakimura
Cc: oauth
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Better title for OAuth 2.0 JWT Authorization Request

The word authorization is implied by OAuth, consider "OAuth 2.0 JWT Request".
--
Jim Manico
@Manicode
(808) 652-3805

On Oct 9, 2015, at 3:43 AM, Nat Sakimura <n-sakimura@nri.co.jp<mailto:n-sakimura@nri.co.jp>> wrote:
Hi OAuthers:

One of the to do for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-05 is to come up with a better title.
The current title “OAuth 2.0 JWT Authorization Request (JAR)”, is somewhat better than what it used to be, but if you can suggest a better name, I am all for it.
Please let me know if you have an idea.
Best,
--
Nat Sakimura <n-sakimura@nri.co.jp<mailto:n-sakimura@nri.co.jp>>
Nomura Research Institute, Ltd.

PLEASE READ:
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only.
If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system.

_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org<mailto:OAuth@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email