Re: [OAUTH-WG] Scope parameter values for "authorization_code" and "client_credentials" based access tokens

[Bill Mills <[e-mail]>]

The scope requested does not have to match the scope granted.  

Also note that space is the scope separator per the spec, so BR=04 is not equal to FB=4_5_15;IntervalDuration=900;BlockDuration=monthly;HistoryLength=13;BR=04 but it's your implementation of how you want to interpret scopes.



On Sunday, February 16, 2014 5:36 PM, Marty Burns <[e-mail]> wrote:
 
Don,
 
Good comment. One point – the authorizations covered by BulkId=04 would have Scopes of:
                        FB=4_5_15;IntervalDuration=900;BlockDuration=monthly;HistoryLength=13;BR=04
Marty
 
 
From:[e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Donald Coffin
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2014 8:14 PM
To: 'Bill Mills'; [e-mail]
Cc: 'greenbutton-dev'
Subject: RE: [OAUTH-WG] Scope parameter values for "authorization_code" and "client_credentials" based access tokens
 
Bill,
 
Thanks for your reply, but I’m not sure you fully understand the situation I am attempting to resolve.
 
For example, does an access token obtained via the “client_credentials” request with the following SCOPE parameter:

                        BulkID=04

allow a client to ask for resources when the individual access token contained the following SCOPE parameter:

                        FB=4_5_15;IntervalDuration=900;BlockDuration=monthly;HistoryLength=13
 
The question is what individual access token authorization should be covered by the “client_credentials” based access token?
 
Best regards,
Don
Donald F. Coffin
Founder/CTO
 
REMI Networks
22751 El Prado Suite 6216
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA  92688-3836
 
Phone:      [phone]
Email:       [e-mail]
 
From:Bill Mills [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2014 8:30 PM
To: Donald Coffin; [e-mail]
Cc: greenbutton-dev
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Scope parameter values for "authorization_code" and "client_credentials" based access tokens
 
To tokens themselves don't differ based on how they are obtained unless you want them to.  No requirement to match scope to the client ID either, but again it's up to you.
 
You do want to get this right.  The challenge here is that your resource servers have to get updated to support new scopes.  If they support auto-updates then it's not quite as big a deal but it's still non-trivial.
 
-bill
 
 
 
On Saturday, February 15, 2014 7:01 PM, Donald Coffin <[e-mail]> wrote:
I would like to get the views and comments of the OAuth 2.0 IETF WG on the following design and implementation question:
 
I have an application that supports both “authorization_code” and “client_credentials” based access tokens.  The application allows a client to obtain data on a nightly basis for resource owners who have granted the application access to their data.  The client application retrieves energy usage information and can potentially need to retrieve data from a few accounts to several million accounts.  In order to eliminate the need for the client application to request the data from the resource server one account at a time, the client application has been designed to support “client_credentials” based access tokens.  Per [RFC 6749 Section 4.4 – “Client Credentials Grant”] The use of the “client_credentials” based access token will allow the client application to obtain access to the data with a single request, thus significantly reducing the amount of network traffic for both the client and the resource server.
 
The question the design team is struggling with is what should the Scope string be for the “client_credentials” based access token and should there be a single access token or can there be multiple “client_credentials” based access tokens?
 
The client application currently supports the following Scope definitions:
 
·         FB=4_5_15;IntervalDuration=900;BlockDuration=monthly;HistoryLength=13
·         FB=4_5_16;IntervalDuration=900;BlockDuration=monthly;HistoryLength=13
 
There are several allowable values for the FB=, IntervalDuration=, BlockDuration=, and HistoryLength= values.  At the moment, there are only two defined Scope values, but as you can see, there could easily be many more potential possibilities.  
 
The question being discussed, is does the “client_credentials” access token request Scope parameter need to match either of the above two strings or can it be something altogether different?  In the event the “client_credentials” access token request Scope parameter needs to match a defined Scope string, does that mean that there MUST be multiple “client_credentials” based access tokens?
 
Thanks in advance for helping clarify our understanding of the relationship between “authorization_code” and “client_credentials” based access tokens.
 
Best regards,
Don
Donald F. Coffin
Founder/CTO
 
REMI Networks
22751 El Prado Suite 6216
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA  92688-3836
 
Phone:      [phone]
Email:       [e-mail]
 

_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "greenbutton-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [e-mail].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.