Re: [OAUTH-WG] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-28: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Fri, 24 April 2015 21:32 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 CF8B91AC3FF; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 14:32:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 mCKzjtDpJqmo; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 14:32:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E3AE1ACD09; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 14:32:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EEFCBE56; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 22:32:25 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w-KPq27y8PCD; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 22:32:24 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.87.48.73] (unknown [86.42.29.198]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DD6E0BE54; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 22:32:23 +0100 (IST)
Message-ID: <553AB662.7010303@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 22:32:18 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu>
References: <20150424115205.3265.73381.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <553A3289.2000401@cs.tcd.ie> <553A34FE.8@mit.edu> <553A35E4.1000904@cs.tcd.ie> <553A376A.1070806@mit.edu> <553A3929.3000002@cs.tcd.ie> <AB914C1E-1D45-4597-A6CC-90B5C3C10945@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <AB914C1E-1D45-4597-A6CC-90B5C3C10945@mit.edu>
OpenPGP: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ewxTdCwvsVLkIAgq5tBOfJij7QeB1NGeG"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/dKadVuALgmLppeHfvsRPlqdwt8c>
Cc: draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg@ietf.org, oauth-chairs@ietf.org, "<oauth@ietf.org>" <oauth@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-28: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
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: <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: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 21:32:28 -0000


On 24/04/15 22:27, Justin Richer wrote:
> Stephen, I’ve worked on this this afternoon and this is my proposed text:
> 
>           The response to such a
>            situation is out of scope for this specification but could include
>            filing a report with the application developer or authorization
>           server provider, attempted re-registration with different metadata
>           values, or various other methods. For instance, if the server also
>           supports a registration management mechanism such as that defined in
>           <xref target="OAuth.Registration.Management"/>, the client or
>           developer could attempt to update the registration with different
>           metadata values. This process could also be aided by a service
>           discovery protocol such as <xref target="OpenID.Discovery"/> which
>           can list a server's capabilities, allowing a client to make a more
>           informed registration request. The use of any such management or
>           discovery system is OPTIONAL and outside the scope of this
>           specification.
> 
> Does this text work for you?

It does, nicely.

Thanks,
S.


> 
>  — Justin
> 
>> On Apr 24, 2015, at 8:38 AM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 24/04/15 13:30, Justin Richer wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>> OK, so are you asking for something like:
>>>
>>> "If the server supports an update mechanism such as [Dyn-Reg-Management]
>>> and a discovery mechanism such as [OIDC-Discovery], then a smart client
>>> could use these components to renegotiate undesirable metadata values."
>>>
>>> With both of these being informative references? I'm not opposed to it.
>>
>> That'd work for me, yes, thanks.
>>
>> S.
>