[OAUTH-WG] Error Responses in Device Code Spec
Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu> Wed, 15 March 2017 16:34 UTC
Return-Path: <jricher@mit.edu>
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 1557613172A for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:34:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 W_o8SIVvRfeo for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:34:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu [18.7.68.36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30946131728 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:33:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 12074424-5afff7000000756e-d7-58c96cf4b3a0
Received: from mailhub-auth-2.mit.edu ( [18.7.62.36]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 85.74.30062.4FC69C85; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:33:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-2.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id v2FGXt4O011137 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:33:56 -0400
Received: from [192.168.128.50] (static-96-237-195-53.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [96.237.195.53]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as jricher@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id v2FGXsx6005757 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:33:55 -0400
From: Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Message-Id: <84F3FF68-9020-402E-B0AF-4F28ADBD377C@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:33:52 -0400
To: "<oauth@ietf.org>" <oauth@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrJIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixG6novsl52SEwfwJ0hYn375ic2D0WLLk J1MAYxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxr22DsaC40wVHRvaGRsYJzN1MXJySAiYSDx8dpgVxBYSaGOS mNak3MXIBWQfY5SYc/MbK4TzgUniUtciFpAqNgFVielrWsC6mQXUJf7Mu8QMYWtLLFv4Gszm FdCXmH3mEli9sICOxKPOJnaIuJXEo/8ngWo4OFiA5ly/EAYSFgEas+b8T6iDZCXe/lrCPIGR dxaSDbOQbJiFZMMCRuZVjLIpuVW6uYmZOcWpybrFyYl5ealFuuZ6uZkleqkppZsYwaHkorKD sbvH+xCjAAejEg/vBN+TEUKsiWXFlbmHGCU5mJREeU86AYX4kvJTKjMSizPii0pzUosPMUpw MCuJ8LZlAeV4UxIrq1KL8mFS0hwsSuK84hqNEUIC6YklqdmpqQWpRTBZGQ4OJQlei2ygRsGi 1PTUirTMnBKENBMHJ8hwHqDhjSA1vMUFibnFmekQ+VOMuhw3jh94wyTEkpeflyolzssDUiQA UpRRmgc3B5QCEt4eNn3FKA70ljDvYpAqHmD6gJv0CmgJE9CStx9OgCwpSURISTUwzuK97Mlg fz7g3Ot9ZpuEnu1gzo+fw1sc7R7C285j87XEKLZSVuK41JTw/bevCV5ev9lKRcX388TA6+5N Hxvjaku2Nz75wblg+tFvZ00Ew983qhj9tNnKt+h91Y6qhELdqRNNJjOdz/npFhzjo/294YfX QutPswUkDB3bvr+be1/jrfMskZ/iSizFGYmGWsxFxYkANlNxXtwCAAA=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/jYMRQy6PHTuJ7S8qo-sGZ0Urg54>
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Error Responses in Device Code Spec
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 15 Mar 2017 16:34:08 -0000
Unless I’m missing something, the current device code spec doesn’t specify errors from the device code endpoint, only from the token endpoint. What are people implementing in practice? We’re using token endpoint style errors (invalid_client, inavlid_grant_type, etc). — Justin
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Error Responses in Device Code Spec Justin Richer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Error Responses in Device Code Spec Mike Jones
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Error Responses in Device Code Spec Justin Richer
- [OAUTH-WG] Error Responses in Device Code Spec Justin Richer