Re: [OAUTH-WG] JWT Secured Authorization Request (JAR) vs OIDC request object

But merge gives us the ability, which has been stated here before, to have a fixed core set of parameters inside the JAR and a mixed set of variable parameters outside the JAR. 

What if by “merge” we really mean “you can’t repeat things in both places but you can have fields in either”.

— Justin

> On Jan 10, 2020, at 9:49 AM, John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> wrote:
> 
> I haven't seen any real use of merge.   It happens with Connect as a side effect of OAuths current requirement to have some of the parameters outside the JAR. 
> 
> Nothing stops servers from ignoring parameters outside JAR or acting on query parameters outside the JAR if they are not in the OAuth registry.   A server can merge but that would not be JAR compliant if they care. 
> 
> If the AS returned an error for parameters values that differ between the JAR and the query that is not required but I don't think that is prohibited.  I need to look at that. 
> 
> JAR dosen't say your server can't do something else, but that is not JAR. 
> 
> Clients should be updated to have all the parameters in the JAR.  That should be the case for most of not all clients now.   
> 
> For older servers they need to continue to include the required OAuth parameters outside. 
> 
> Servers need to migrate and eventually move to returning a warning or error when a registry parameter is outside the JAR if JAR is used. 
> 
> Especially if PAR is used (I suspect that will become the prefers pattern) then merging won't really make sense. 
> 
> John B. 
> 
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020, 6:19 AM Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net <mailto:torsten@lodderstedt.net>> wrote:
> 
> 
>> Am 06.01.2020 um 23:50 schrieb John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com <mailto:ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>>:
>> 
>> A client could duplicate those outside the request object for some sort of backwards compatability but they will be ignored.
>> 
> Is this used for backward compatibility with the OIDC servers?
>> What we have lost is the merge capability.  There are some use cases that could use that to have a presigned object that some paramaters like state are outside.  
>> 
> 
> Is this option used in the wild? As far as I understand the main use case is a 3rd party signing the request object that way entitling the client for something. I‘m asking since in my experience any kind of entitlement by a 3rd party is handled behind the scene using registries.
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth