Re: [OAUTH-WG] Proposed Syntax Changes in Dynamic Registration

Tony, can you be more specific? What needs to be changed in your 
opinion? What text changes would you suggest?

  -- Justin

On 05/20/2013 02:09 PM, Anthony Nadalin wrote:
>
> Agree
>
> *From:*oauth-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] *On 
> Behalf Of *Phil Hunt
> *Sent:* Monday, May 20, 2013 9:42 AM
> *To:* Justin Richer
> *Cc:* oauth@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [OAUTH-WG] Proposed Syntax Changes in Dynamic Registration
>
> This draft isn't ready for LC.
>
> Phil
>
>
> On 2013-05-20, at 8:49, Justin Richer <jricher@mitre.org 
> <mailto:jricher@mitre.org>> wrote:
>
>     But also keep in mind that this is last-call, and that we don't
>     really want to encourage avoidable drastic changes at this stage.
>
>      -- Justin
>
>     On 05/20/2013 11:21 AM, Phil Hunt wrote:
>
>         Keep in mind there may be other changes coming.
>
>         The issue is that new developers can't figure out what token
>         is being referred to.
>
>
>         Phil
>
>
>         On 2013-05-20, at 8:09, Justin Richer <jricher@mitre.org
>         <mailto:jricher@mitre.org>> wrote:
>
>             Phil Hunt's review of the Dynamic Registration
>             specification has raised a couple of issues that I felt
>             were getting buried by the larger discussion (which I
>             still strongly encourage others to jump in to). Namely,
>             Phil has suggested a couple of syntax changes to the names
>             of several parameters.
>
>
>             1) expires_at -> client_secret_expires_at
>             2) issued_at -> client_id_issued_at
>             3) token_endpoint_auth_method ->
>             token_endpoint_client_auth_method
>
>
>             I'd like to get a feeling, *especially from developers*
>             who have deployed this draft spec, what we ought to do for
>             each of these:
>
>              A) Keep the parameter names as-is
>              B) Adopt the new names as above
>              C) Adopt a new name that I will specify
>
>             In all cases, clarifying text will be added to the
>             parameter *definitions* so that it's more clear to people
>             reading the spec what each piece does. Speaking as the
>             editor: "A" is the default as far as I'm concerned, since
>             we shouldn't change syntax without very good reason to do
>             so. That said, if it's going to be better for developers
>             with the new parameter names, I am open to fixing them now.
>
>             Naming things is hard.
>
>              -- Justin
>
>             _______________________________________________
>             OAuth mailing list
>             OAuth@ietf.org <mailto:OAuth@ietf.org>
>             https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>