Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Conference Call: Wed 28 Aug, 2pm PDT: Conference Bridge Details

Justin Richer <jricher@mitre.org> Wed, 28 August 2013 16:08 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 F19D811E81FE for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 09:08:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.488
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.488 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.111, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 hDmLHH8mtZud for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 09:08:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpksrv1.mitre.org (smtpksrv1.mitre.org [198.49.146.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B20611E81B4 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 09:08:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpksrv1.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 83BF822601B4; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:08:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from IMCCAS01.MITRE.ORG (imccas01.mitre.org [129.83.29.78]) by smtpksrv1.mitre.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7254822601D2; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:08:48 -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; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:08:48 -0400
Message-ID: <521E2086.1010007@mitre.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:08:38 -0400
From: Justin Richer <jricher@mitre.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130623 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Phil Hunt <phil.hunt@oracle.com>
References: <1373E8CE237FCC43BCA36C6558612D2AA28D6A@USCHMBX001.nsn-intra.net> <4D9D4AAD-55F9-4B7E-A56F-5BC42F028E13@oracle.com> <B14A12F5-EF5C-4529-90B7-C30E17958907@oracle.com> <521E1A34.30204@mitre.org> <BC009D74-FEF3-4827-8C0D-1B2FCCF9DA65@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <BC009D74-FEF3-4827-8C0D-1B2FCCF9DA65@oracle.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [129.83.31.56]
Cc: oauth mailing list <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Conference Call: Wed 28 Aug, 2pm PDT: Conference Bridge Details
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: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:08:54 -0000

I set up an auth server to protect my API, my users download a piece of 
software that speaks the API to access their data. Where is my server 
supposed to get the list of "approved" software classes from? Are you 
assuming a central registry per API? Or is it going to be 
provider-specific? If the latter, why wouldn't you just do manual 
registration and not use dynamic registration at all? After all, manual 
registration will always still be a valid option.

  -- Justin

On 08/28/2013 12:02 PM, Phil Hunt wrote:
> Please define the all in one case. I think this is the edge case and is in fact rare.
>
> I agree, in many cases step 1 can be made by simply approving a class of software. But then step 2 is simplified.
>
> Dyn reg assumes every registration of an instance is unique which too me is a very extreme position.
>
> Phil
>
> On 2013-08-28, at 8:41, Justin Richer <jricher@mitre.org> wrote:
>
>> Except for the cases where you want step 1 to happen in band. To me, that is a vitally and fundamentally important use case that we can't disregard, and we must have a solution that can accommodate that. The notions of "publisher" and "product" fade very quickly once you get outside of the software vendor world.
>>
>> This is, of course, not to stand in the way of other solutions or approaches (such as something assertion based like you're after). It's not a one-or-the-other proposition, especially when there are mutually exclusive aspects of each.
>>
>> Therefore I once again call for the WG to finish the current dynamic registration spec *AND* pursue the assertion based process that Phil's talking about. They're not mutually exclusive, let's please stop talking about them like they are.
>>
>> -- Justin
>>
>> On 08/28/2013 11:17 AM, Phil Hunt wrote:
>>> Sorry. I meant also to say i think there are 2 registration steps.
>>>
>>> 1. Software registration/approval. This often happens out of band. But in this step policy is defined that approves software for use. Many of the reg params are known here.
>>>
>>> Federation techniques come into play as trust approvals can be based on developer, product or even publisher.
>>>
>>> 2. Each instance associates in a stateless way. Only clients that need credential rotation need more.
>>>
>>> Phil
>>>
>>> On 2013-08-28, at 8:04, Phil Hunt <phil.hunt@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have a conflict I cannot get out of for 2pacific.
>>>>
>>>> I think a certificate based approach is going to simplify exchanges in all cases. I encourage the group to explore the concept on the call.
>>>>
>>>> I am not sure breaking dyn reg up helps. It creates yet another option. I would like to explore how federation concept in software statements can help with facilitating association and making many reg stateless.
>>>>
>>>> Phil
>>>>
>>>> On 2013-08-28, at 5:43, "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Here are the conference bridge / Webex details for the call today.
>>>>> We are going to complete the use case discussions from last time (Phil wasn't able to walk through all slides). Justin was also able to work out a strawman proposal based on the discussions last week and we will have a look at it to see whether this is a suitable compromise. Here is Justin's mail, in case you have missed it: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg12036.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Phil, please feel free to make adjustments to your slides given the Justin's recent proposal.
>>>>>
>>>>> Topic: OAuth Dynamic Client Registration
>>>>> Date: Wednesday, August 28, 2013
>>>>> Time: 2:00 pm, Pacific Daylight Time (San Francisco, GMT-07:00)
>>>>> Meeting Number: 703 230 586
>>>>> Meeting Password: oauth
>>>>>
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To join the online meeting
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> 1. Go to https://nsn.webex.com/nsn/j.php?ED=269567657&UID=0&PW=NNTI1ZWQzMDJk&RT=MiM0
>>>>> 2. Enter your name and email address.
>>>>> 3. Enter the meeting password: oauth
>>>>> 4. Click "Join Now".
>>>>>
>>>>> To view in other time zones or languages, please click the link:
>>>>> https://nsn.webex.com/nsn/j.php?ED=269567657&UID=0&PW=NNTI1ZWQzMDJk&ORT=MiM0
>>>>>
>>>>> To add this meeting to your calendar program (for example Microsoft Outlook), click this link:
>>>>> https://nsn.webex.com/nsn/j.php?ED=269567657&UID=0&ICS=MI&LD=1&RD=2&ST=1&SHA2=C6-AjLGvhdYjmpVdx75M6UsAwrNLMsequ5n95Gyv1R8=&RT=MiM0
>>>>>
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To join the teleconference only
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Global dial-in Numbers: http://www.nokiasiemensnetworks.com/nvc
>>>>> Conference Code: 944 910 5485
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OAuth mailing list
>>>>> OAuth@ietf.org
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OAuth mailing list
>>>> OAuth@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OAuth mailing list
>>> OAuth@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth