IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] "access grant" terminology

Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com> Sun, 11 July 2010 06:59 UTC

Return-Path: <beaton@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 CE1F03A6907 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:59:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.565
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.565 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.412, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, 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 oHP+4433QOur for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:59:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [216.239.44.51]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E86863A68B6 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:59:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hpaq3.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq3.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.3]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o6B6xHQL001151 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:59:18 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1278831558; bh=51+vYznmLOqIBJxZMUVER7ZpdTo=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=DUA8gVhTbNYJRaXxzBMbip6/CcO47csP5YspS2FUxLwF8aUkubTZkJGRdryL8l95G OhRzLUyLYP4cGZ08iRipA==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=CLHdkqGg5O+bjSKRDAiwcdO09Fv+lS9Lk2EfPZGnToKl8L3wVaDG1wdfNmT0sz2G5 aEsHiiYdaITsBg/D8hbgA==
Received: from pwj9 (pwj9.prod.google.com [10.241.219.73]) by hpaq3.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o6B6xG9B020147 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:59:16 -0700
Received: by pwj9 with SMTP id 9so1580402pwj.13 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:59:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.207.9 with SMTP id e9mr634319wfg.111.1278831555611; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:59:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.142.193.19 with HTTP; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:59:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <C85E82A8.36FA5%eran@hueniverse.com>
References: <AANLkTikq4C9FYySiDmJqEBJIiYoYGxC9ZbpaPqHKgDgY@mail.gmail.com> <C85E82A8.36FA5%eran@hueniverse.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:59:15 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimMJkEMfvvaSx-GZP3pDK1Fa62QuSS8-gh8lWap@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com>
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] "access grant" terminology
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: Sun, 11 Jul 2010 06:59:12 -0000

On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 8:03 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com> wrote:
> I think authorization credential is going to confuse most readers. The spec
> refers to credentials almost exclusively when dealing with identifier and
> password (client, end-user), or as a general term for client authentication.
> Authorization is specific to the end-user authorization endpoint and will be
> confusing when used with assertions and other grant types.

This doesn't hold water.  "authorization credential" is consistent
with existing practice and definition:

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2828.txt

   $ credential(s)
      (I) Data that is transferred or presented to establish either a
      claimed identity or the authorizations of a system entity. (See:
      authentication information, capability, ticket.)

> Note that since this term impacts the name of the current 'grant_type'
> parameter, changing it means code changes.

Given the number of bugs in the -09 spec, I don't think this matters.

v2.34.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status