Re: [OAUTH-WG] AD review of draft-ietf-oauth-bearer-13

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Thu, 03 November 2011 08:50 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
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 4ECB311E80A6 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 01:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.458
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.458 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.859, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 hzzbcwazYOI7 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 01:50:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 31FAE11E80D2 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 01:50:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 03 Nov 2011 08:49:56 -0000
Received: from p5DCC9287.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [93.204.146.135] by mail.gmx.net (mp040) with SMTP; 03 Nov 2011 09:49:56 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/u3jlUI/DuGnP8KyMnJZ8RA4tVCkuk4IM1U+D7Ul dUKLf26ZfBSy9g
Message-ID: <4EB255AF.6040002@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 09:49:51 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com>
References: <4EB173A1.6040209@cs.tcd.ie> <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E112925965A8@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com>
In-Reply-To: <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E112925965A8@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] AD review of draft-ietf-oauth-bearer-13
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: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:50:02 -0000

On 2011-11-03 00:21, Manger, James H wrote:
>> 5) Section 3 ABNF allows "realm=foo;realm=bar;scope=baz;error=123"
>> is that ok? Is processing clear for all cases? I don't think it
>> is.
>
>
> The ABNF does not allow that.
> It requires commas as separators, not semi-colons.

Indeed.

> It requires double quotes around values.

(but maybe it should not; separate issue)

> The only possible ambiguity in this example is the duplicate realms, but that parameter isn't even defined in this spec (it is defined in draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth)! I guess that spec could try to explicitly define behaviour in the case of this particular error, but it may have to explicitly describe a lot of other error cases as well.

Indeed. I have opened a ticket for that 
<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/321>. UAs disagree on 
it, so I think all that needs to be done here is to point out that it's 
invalid.

Best regards, Julian