IETF Logo Mail Archive

[OAUTH-WG] Should registration request be form-urlencoded or JSON?

Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com> Mon, 04 February 2013 21:25 UTC

Return-Path: <Michael.Jones@microsoft.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 B2A8D21F8AC0 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:25:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W6cPzp1oitxO for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:25:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (na01-by2-obe.ptr.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 151E221F8AB8 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:25:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from BL2FFO11FD009.protection.gbl (10.173.161.201) by BL2FFO11HUB029.protection.gbl (10.173.161.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.609.9; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 21:25:50 +0000
Received: from TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (131.107.125.37) by BL2FFO11FD009.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.173.161.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.609.9 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 21:25:50 +0000
Received: from TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.1.132]) by TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.79.174]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.003; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 21:25:23 +0000
From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
To: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Should registration request be form-urlencoded or JSON?
Thread-Index: Ac4DHiIcTE3oals3S1ip2f/AR/tbdw==
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:25:22 +0000
Message-ID: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B1680429673943674111BE@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.78]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B1680429673943674111BETK5EX14MBXC284r_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.37; CTRY:US; IPV:CAL; IPV:NLI; EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(199002)(189002)(74502001)(49866001)(79102001)(50986001)(44976002)(47446002)(47736001)(55846006)(4396001)(16236675001)(47976001)(512954001)(77982001)(5343635001)(53806001)(56816002)(54316002)(59766001)(33656001)(5343655001)(63696002)(76482001)(74662001)(20776003)(56776001)(31966008)(54356001)(46102001)(15202345001)(51856001)(16406001); DIR:OUT; SFP:; SCL:1; SRVR:BL2FFO11HUB029; H:TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com; RD:InfoDomainNonexistent; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.onmicrosoft.com
X-Forefront-PRVS: 07473990A5
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Should registration request be form-urlencoded or JSON?
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: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:25:53 -0000

Now that we're returning the registration state as JSON, it's pretty inconsistent for the registration request to instead be form-url-encoded. The case can be made for switching to JSON now - especially in light of possibly wanting to convey some structured information at registration time.
I realize that this is a big change, but if we're going to do it, we should do it now.
As a precedent, apparently SCIM requests are JSON, rather than form-url-encoded.

                                                                -- Mike

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email