Re: [OAUTH-WG] dpop terminogly

Manuel Nieves <fordamboy1@gmail.com> Sun, 04 April 2021 23:46 UTC

Return-Path: <fordamboy1@gmail.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 432443A1F55 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 16:46:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.847
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.847 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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-vIZjV_JgVI for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 16:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x82d.google.com (mail-qt1-x82d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE89D3A1F53 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 16:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x82d.google.com with SMTP id u8so7391207qtq.12 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Sun, 04 Apr 2021 16:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=hxItlsgmOxDUVlU0ovNMqqbkNb1rb9Xr/qEQ5tzxvIc=; b=V7IiGK6E3b4qsIFokioP2htopOtNmG1Y58BI+OTks+h+9KOYtyQc5kOLwaNpPdAr7U Trhr2ZVNWx/K7kBjPyRcHo1sOPBzrdT55SKxJXdWlxmthwaWGfxz7Llp0hrhWsXQRoZc L5seFWAzZDB0StvdH6HIX9aWO3rtgp3cPiXpyu60k7KSFhjzm4+sBeaInM5MsydIeVGW MQbR8BHs6D1kHBi2O22zxbLtIuHK2MOHGNYc5Xgj1etn+l0HBs4KB09coxOEdBRCVktf mxzmoFaJltK4kEj2uGOZ9rp4g4efhqezm8ZPPZsYc3nvnD5y1XlSiWlglfMJss/j/zuw hqNg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=hxItlsgmOxDUVlU0ovNMqqbkNb1rb9Xr/qEQ5tzxvIc=; b=ET2Y2pD2mYnsjYlXamZtmpOY3/IYX9H09nQ9fEkDhY0MYMpPWiflW67q8fHhgKMNux a5C+Ql7Qm4EDMrrj0NYXjORbFnqTq5FehOruyz9eLRT5nM3DV4McL0AkBcIAz5gG8tYn 8NpIOpU3CbvK0F3Yo3VyPvtoeLL4eVBl7531WeuxBXLbJ9Ce1U7zCXgXLtQ13kiWXXmH czI6ilD4fzTlu7dH+Ouq1+BpmPR1OSuadS7XOovAi3xsq/7zIaD7lhYZ/J+jzx397Y50 akIrFDH2J4Va86jGF+Z9ztHqPTAButiBHKQoWGKnAN2QwqX7rMhqYKV+5NfbwOW/QEPZ DlBA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Y9vQi+OPECzt9iNbWblCeo2BPm98Vca2Ge9OkfcMD0E2Aw+QK liA/jcXHrdirlQp299AQNy549vSsWDpF3Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzOfpon9ofeCAHvBbCT0diaMCDFTq7bnedHvQVO6bGMPy8iX+o/ZwqyHwEh0m7hNUyzjBpDCA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:18a:: with SMTP id s10mr20018649qtw.237.1617579999722; Sun, 04 Apr 2021 16:46:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.157] (pool-108-21-243-205.nycmny.fios.verizon.net. [108.21.243.205]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c5sm12491782qkg.105.2021.04.04.16.46.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 04 Apr 2021 16:46:38 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.60.0.2.21\))
From: Manuel Nieves <fordamboy1@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <745359AE-98D7-4AC0-B088-E522E8CF3FFC@aueb.gr>
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2021 19:46:37 -0400
Cc: oauth <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6212452E-F608-4F0B-A9C5-6DB51C96069C@gmail.com>
References: <745359AE-98D7-4AC0-B088-E522E8CF3FFC@aueb.gr>
To: Nikos Fotiou <fotiou@aueb.gr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.60.0.2.21)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/w9DIhdgZ67At1PIFVeRiO1Qugpw>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] dpop terminogly
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 04 Apr 2021 23:46:46 -0000

Hello you want to better help me understand what is this you referring too?



> On Apr 4, 2021, at 5:15 PM, Nikos Fotiou <fotiou@aueb.gr> wrote:
> 
> Hi I am wondering if the following terminology is more appropriate for the DPoP draft (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fett-oauth-dpop-04):
> - Since a DPoP proof is a JWT encoded in a JWS may be it is better to say "DPoP proof payload" instead of "DPoP proof body" (end of page 4).
> - For the same reason use "JOSE header" instead of "JSON header" (beginning of page 5)
> - Moreover, here and there it is stated "the header of the JWT". AFAIU JWTs do not have headers themselves but the header is part of the JWS/JWE structure in which the JWT is encoded. So may be it is more appropriate to say "the JOSE header" instead of "the header of the JWT". 
> 
> Best,
> Nikos
> 
> --
> Nikos Fotiou - http://pages.cs.aueb.gr/~fotiou
> Researcher - Mobile Multimedia Laboratory
> Athens University of Economics and Business
> https://mm.aueb.gr
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth