IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device Code expiration and syntax

John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> Wed, 15 March 2017 23:15 UTC

Return-Path: <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.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 EEE8E129C70 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 16:15:27 -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=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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=ve7jtb-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 rDk5d8DVknIO for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 16:15:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22f.google.com (mail-qk0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22f]) (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 9C618129C4C for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 16:15:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id 1so26230701qkl.3 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 16:15:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ve7jtb-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=pUFM38fmAnVumQNnjMxp1bQ6HN3fgAbht76AZY7IBx4=; b=lYVP/9hfojQIWhivVgwzcrNzPWVT+2hv6TsfMqI3fNMQxyeNaNzk90ofjmcYP9ueTP B7ocvTMhHgjflY5AGs+A/h86th1LJ1SqmgBgDmklyqu9po/2Jb2pgI0fgPH+3r3XNLS0 syG+s4SmQWujw+Z5+fn4T7OjHD+oyW2cB0zLbIPfh7Vbn3hSO+9xVllACppOdDJjlX9v 2W0zd/+unohI+uI9wUbbjuFryptr0purOd47wNL5BsE56D3MBCiMYyrR74Lpxc9tI/6W LgDvYOyukNm8bxLeVCULYdzQitJLCgFicRjhvMr4zlKcnBpn1ZteKEvCz8zFsXwh/T2E SzbQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=pUFM38fmAnVumQNnjMxp1bQ6HN3fgAbht76AZY7IBx4=; b=Y85iH0Te+yyUVMJ2lGRP8eTOppu0vkfUMGmL0UKOgWY3m6g7n6mUxlviV0DQPEnCn8 9BEqbqiJcwfPljBz57B5fPXRx7UBFl+QiB5SW5JnzjI0b79QdRj3akbJer/zMuI3mVle mfkPWqhB2qCPYgA93rzE/JmxgyyzuoEG9g1Ympfn8k51DYjYmLKM1itp/Vdvenn8NRoe dE8DjsliLBfPzOTSP8dZBxsM9CytJk2HpGnvmnQ615DNknCSOssAPbm6TInHJCaRt0iy 0x+jZ7ZotOvgGfUL4fdTRbxRBVXlGXAXlrwoC84MMSKPPkQFUKnCkpOP9Cki62Cxiadn 2cxQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2PgCvHWQbF1/7ATbRAXS95NF4Jhr6YpmqvvXYGFZ+XPbboEgi/EWgZO+552OHLF2cw
X-Received: by 10.55.149.197 with SMTP id x188mr5841154qkd.70.1489619724739; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 16:15:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.8.100] ([181.201.174.76]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f128sm2344411qkd.62.2017.03.15.16.15.22 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 15 Mar 2017 16:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
Message-Id: <69CC44FD-27B3-40DD-8D8A-B3D18D09B804@ve7jtb.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 20:15:20 -0300
In-Reply-To: <CA+k3eCRsF6cdzypnV8a0hpqRDLetgKBC++EjLqQ5u_c5b17tfw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: William Denniss <wdenniss@google.com>, "<oauth@ietf.org>" <oauth@ietf.org>
To: Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com>
References: <AEE72C0E-6FFA-4BE5-87EB-D2EBF891211E@mit.edu> <CAAP42hBAaAMf0ojSBYL55O1GiUZ4Hx2Z43jRoWZqsm6=HVCVNQ@mail.gmail.com> <0CAB3A6D-5B80-41DF-9499-35D21D98F7B7@mit.edu> <CAAP42hCUBKt=cHRQ8jKETRzmLxZsnKbxthtSE=xmXhLpGkH+rg@mail.gmail.com> <CA+k3eCRsF6cdzypnV8a0hpqRDLetgKBC++EjLqQ5u_c5b17tfw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="94eb2c0831228dccd2054acd1e06"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/wI92fnTfJe5Qz9xl9ACQRu3kDc0>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device Code expiration and syntax
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 23:15:28 -0000

I think response mode is only needed if you are overloading a existing authorization endpoint.

URI are cheep so I don’t see the value.



> On Mar 13, 2017, at 8:47 AM, Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 1:54 PM, William Denniss <wdenniss@google.com <mailto:wdenniss@google.com>> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu <mailto:jricher@mit.edu>> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Secondly, I had a question about the “response_type” parameter to the device endpoint. This parameter is required and it has a single, required value, with no registry or other possibility of extension. What’s the point? If it’s for “parallelism”, I’ll note that this is *not* the authorization endpoint (as the user is not present) and such constraints need not apply here.
>> 
>> Good points here. At a guess, it bled in from the OAuth spec. If it's not needed, we should remove it.
>> 
> 
> I’d vote for removal, I don’t see the point.
> 
> +1 on removal of the “response_type” parameter from the Device Authorization Request
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email