Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration
Eran Hammer <eran@hueniverse.com> Sun, 15 April 2012 20:36 UTC
Return-Path: <eran@hueniverse.com>
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 2825A21F8797 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:36:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 Z3gPBXQK7QqJ for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:36:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p3plex2out02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plex2out02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [184.168.131.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A02C21F8796 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:36:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from P3PWEX2HT003.ex2.secureserver.net ([184.168.131.11]) by p3plex2out02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with bizsmtp id yLc11i0010EuLVk01Lc1Zw; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:36:01 -0700
Received: from P3PWEX2MB008.ex2.secureserver.net ([169.254.8.115]) by P3PWEX2HT003.ex2.secureserver.net ([184.168.131.11]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:36:01 -0700
From: Eran Hammer <eran@hueniverse.com>
To: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration
Thread-Index: AQHNGYLIAhnVBxyYNEuwmb5Seq6ic5abalPQgAEZ9wD//9bm0A==
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 20:36:01 +0000
Message-ID: <0CBAEB56DDB3A140BA8E8C124C04ECA2FE92E4@P3PWEX2MB008.ex2.secureserver.net>
References: <5F51A14F-D548-4D29-B20F-5C3DCB3CB705@gmx.net> <0CBAEB56DDB3A140BA8E8C124C04ECA2FE7F47@P3PWEX2MB008.ex2.secureserver.net> <6760C38E-7C0C-412F-A285-8F4CB2858F30@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <6760C38E-7C0C-412F-A285-8F4CB2858F30@gmx.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [64.74.213.174]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org WG" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client 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: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 20:36:03 -0000
Where did I say I'm not interested in this work?! All I was saying is that it would be better to postpone it until the discovery layer, which this draft clearly relies upon, is a bit clearer. I would be satisfied with a simple note stating that if the discovery work at the APP area isn't complete, the WG may choose to delay work on this document until ready. EH > -----Original Message----- > From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net] > Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2012 9:01 AM > To: Eran Hammer > Cc: Hannes Tschofenig; oauth@ietf.org WG > Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration > > Hi Eran, > > you are saying that you are not interested in the dynamic client registration > work and that's OK. There are, however, a couple of other folks in the group > who had expressed interest to work on it, to review and to implement it. > > Note also that the discovery and the dynamic client registration is different > from each other; there is a relationship but they are nevertheless different. > > Ciao > Hannes > > PS: Moving the Simple Web Discovery to the Apps area working group does > not mean that it will not be done. On the contrary there will be work happing > and we are just trying to figure out what the difference between SWD and > WebFinger is. > > On Apr 15, 2012, at 9:14 AM, Eran Hammer wrote: > > > I'd like to see 'Dynamic Client Registration' removed from the charter along > with SWD for the sole reason that figuring out a generic discovery mechanism > is going to take some time and this WG has enough other work to focus on > while that happens elsewhere. I expect this to come back in the next round > with much more deployment experience and discovery clarity. > > > > EH > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: oauth-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] On > >> Behalf Of Hannes Tschofenig > >> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 7:36 AM > >> To: oauth@ietf.org WG > >> Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> at the IETF#83 OAuth working group meeting we had some confusion > >> about the Dynamic Client Registration and the Simple Web Discovery > >> item. I just listened to the audio recording again. > >> > >> With the ongoing mailing list discussion regarding WebFinger vs. > >> Simple Web Discovery I hope that folks had a chance to look at the > >> documents again and so the confusion of some got resolved. > >> > >> I believe the proposed new charter item is sufficiently clear with > >> regard to the scope of the work. Right? > >> Here is the item again: > >> " > >> Jul. 2013 Submit 'OAuth Dynamic Client Registration Protocol' to the > >> IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard > >> > >> [Starting point for the work will be > >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hardjono-oauth-dynreg > >> ] > >> " > >> > >> Of course there there is a relationship between Simple Web Discovery > >> (or > >> WebFinger) and the dynamic client registration since the client first > >> needs to discover the client registration endpoint at the > >> authorization server before interacting with it. > >> > >> Now, one thing that just came to my mind when looking again at draft- > >> hardjono-oauth-dynreq was the following: Could the Client > >> Registration Request and Response protocol exchange could become a > >> profile of the SCIM protocol? In some sense this exchange is nothing > >> else than provisioning an account at the Authorization Server (along with > some meta-data). > >> > >> Is this too far fetched? > >> > >> Ciao > >> Hannes > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> OAuth mailing list > >> OAuth@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
- [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Eve Maler
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration William Mills
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Derek Atkins
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Justin Richer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Igor Faynberg
- [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Phil Hunt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Richer, Justin P.
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Phil Hunt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Phil Hunt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Richer, Justin P.
- [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Richer, Justin P.
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Phil Hunt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Richer, Justin P.
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration John Bradley