[OAUTH-WG] Proposed Syntax Changes in Dynamic Registration

Justin Richer <jricher@mitre.org> Mon, 20 May 2013 15:09 UTC

Return-Path: <jricher@mitre.org>
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 C6B5C21F89FF for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2013 08:09:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.186
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.186 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.412, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Mf0SxEtIfxZl for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2013 08:09:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpksrv1.mitre.org (smtpksrv1.mitre.org [198.49.146.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5A5D21F88D8 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2013 08:09:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpksrv1.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 16CCD1F046E for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2013 11:09:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from IMCCAS01.MITRE.ORG (imccas01.mitre.org [129.83.29.78]) by smtpksrv1.mitre.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6AAA1F0666 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2013 11:09:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [10.146.15.13] (129.83.31.56) by IMCCAS01.MITRE.ORG (129.83.29.78) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.342.3; Mon, 20 May 2013 11:09:42 -0400
Message-ID: <519A3C9A.8060305@mitre.org>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 11:09:14 -0400
From: Justin Richer <jricher@mitre.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060602010402030306040004"
X-Originating-IP: [129.83.31.56]
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Proposed Syntax Changes in Dynamic Registration
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, 20 May 2013 15:09:53 -0000

Phil Hunt's review of the Dynamic Registration specification has raised 
a couple of issues that I felt were getting buried by the larger 
discussion (which I still strongly encourage others to jump in to). 
Namely, Phil has suggested a couple of syntax changes to the names of 
several parameters.


1) expires_at -> client_secret_expires_at
2) issued_at -> client_id_issued_at
3) token_endpoint_auth_method -> token_endpoint_client_auth_method


I'd like to get a feeling, *especially from developers* who have 
deployed this draft spec, what we ought to do for each of these:

  A) Keep the parameter names as-is
  B) Adopt the new names as above
  C) Adopt a new name that I will specify

In all cases, clarifying text will be added to the parameter 
*definitions* so that it's more clear to people reading the spec what 
each piece does. Speaking as the editor: "A" is the default as far as 
I'm concerned, since we shouldn't change syntax without very good reason 
to do so. That said, if it's going to be better for developers with the 
new parameter names, I am open to fixing them now.

Naming things is hard.

  -- Justin