IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Returning HTTP 200 on Error for JSONP

John Panzer <jpanzer@google.com> Wed, 18 August 2010 02:33 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 887F53A6858 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:33:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.877
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.877 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, 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 08DM5n1OAYP9 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:33:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [216.239.44.51]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0FAC3A684F for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:33:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hpaq13.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq13.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.13]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o7I2Y0DH031473 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:34:01 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1282098841; bh=cbPMiewWmp7HEHTFuk8aH9vf1+I=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=oo/Mj9y3GgZRtdXbGQoz9izSNo8Rqjs6gBzKazGE9jLYrDBn6eGPCxMulnqWlNR8J VMff2S8yPAJt+YnKNmCtA==
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:content-transfer-encoding:x-system-of-record; b=Brk4FpkCD2d8y/52PU183rWQocJ/GlodchvPQYqSjqLRTLoFe810Gxn1XjlqWvoVO 6Sa4mgboVKbI/tCsgc0wA==
Received: from gyf2 (gyf2.prod.google.com [10.243.50.66]) by hpaq13.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o7I2XoKV030895 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:33:59 -0700
Received: by gyf2 with SMTP id 2so15831gyf.22 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:33:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.32.19 with SMTP id f19mr8463955anf.257.1282098838979; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:33:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.101.126.6 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:33:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinriRSq9_z4M-Brr59pyhJQm8aGaMnh6dsmmjqH@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1643FCF1-841F-41FF-B8A8-43269320CFA8@facebook.com> <D2742806-9180-4A5B-98D5-BFD68AF74EEA@facebook.com> <AANLkTikvz1FNvHN0W4TYyUn=0Nq_At2c+x793XTdwyLm@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinBqMvmKuoUq7Fy7XmJue5VEFYcw7qoca=0cWFs@mail.gmail.com> <4C69B719.3060303@lodderstedt.net> <DFB12E92-0E4D-46C2-8103-C74BAE6F65F9@facebook.com> <4C6A25F7.8060301@lodderstedt.net> <AANLkTinHehcMCsmxJt0hvLbLrLC5ERrjG38GDxaAMsiZ@mail.gmail.com> <241FE353-C52A-4505-8620-DEE9CF9F940E@lodderstedt.net> <FC1E2149-F8FF-4010-AAB8-273F8E2DC498@facebook.com> <AANLkTinz4r3AwTva1fu0okobC70Ht1gZei5wjN2eQW3H@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinSCrXs1LaLY1ByNFi_Ec9WOr2ETQdpRXYfm+ra@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinriRSq9_z4M-Brr59pyhJQm8aGaMnh6dsmmjqH@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:33:58 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=vGVVzzaQ8AP+bN=YU6_EXavc_M9Xr-sFLvL76@mail.gmail.com>
From: John Panzer <jpanzer@google.com>
To: Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Returning HTTP 200 on Error for JSONP
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: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:33:30 -0000

Is there any legit reason other than jsonp specifically?

In the wild I mean.

On Tuesday, August 17, 2010, Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 11:48 AM, David Recordon <recordond@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Luke's point still holds true of the core spec needing to allow a 200 status
>> code on an error in this scenario. I'd also rather see this as part of the
>> core spec as it reduces the number of things that implementors will need to
>> read for common use cases.
>
> For the record, I think any implementer that is relying on protected
> resources returning special response codes for any type of OAuth
> protocol issue is probably going to get burned.  Variation in
> protected resource behavior has been a consistent problem in OAuth
> 1.0, and I doubt that can change in OAuth 2.
>
> It's tough to get protected resource servers to be consistent; they
> frequently have good reasons (e.g. jsonp) to be inconsistent.
>
> Authorization servers are simpler beasts.
>

-- 
--
John Panzer / Google
jpanzer@google.com / abstractioneer.org / @jpanzer

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status