Re: [OAUTH-WG] Namespacing "type" in RAR

Torsten Lodderstedt <> Wed, 22 July 2020 21:03 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB5293A0998 for <>; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:03:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id idyaqzxntLXu for <>; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:02:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::633]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF2A23A0996 for <>; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:02:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id w9so3784409ejc.8 for <>; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:02:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=jLOvDnFUK/UDw5yTgm+11Hur42Nl4DM9UfMsxvtU9Tg=; b=3dvehO9FYZY+IC0xFzFlPgyk1gRLRuYM9ImWcWqvmqRK4I/TcUfMp8WU4PZ7Ys+FIy wXaauIT50Z1l7n6DM+XyKL7FcY4DHP+0/4dWMtJdPwxfYvgV4vkDk3r3WwsVdIztwIqu 8Al1ZojUv4NucVebR5KpDxGT1G2pNmJ2/tkeLFGtnecC90XgOjRvJg2GfmX/DDj1qnIz H2pXpXfCwDykv9twJWPRzGA8MNbIxVqUdbkDJqVZgZK6f5MMT06gOQPJG/fAmj3vjRG2 wFp45Zw6R6qMa4l0ei4SYgmi6KVmSi6KAFU7e1+s8PcXvnomvy97VK0KEolWv/MkQhaP fPmg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=jLOvDnFUK/UDw5yTgm+11Hur42Nl4DM9UfMsxvtU9Tg=; b=I9Q4jsGJqEFmDNs52qNvM4OSNh6oED/0EQhmXmkv3Nr9odhWB+Ruot02hgqhQU/m7V x4wo/mxaRzXjED5npv9ru97+OgHD0qReGOpR+tP8Gy1G3CDuctM5Jm5umV/jwcwUvS2r TDt+p94EALKh+74pDGJTkB8hlGJpxBkwvg1dTugyYfv+l5tTlZErhi7dSH9pFqYbVy8C 3KL9UxUz7W0a72YYRVVXbZ6aCfP430Rx8KXyOoA1kipPsAMDaS2BDofqVvWGOToguvdG jko6+RcU7KD+2jDaQbWXsXxYIkZ99yn0Lc0VUKWoFvGmsFUxUPLiKXdiiiNHvLxz/W0U 0cog==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531u7fUljMT308WwshkFa/HQnXuq98KLER2Xnu2WIO6N6xBBkRjV pHUb4v09fdEcEdrAfhMGLdk8VqHp4NU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzVnOUxe8ZJILs0tOA90IFySXinvQemE1XHkY/tD3w2fBX0gEGkFa9yudIXuTDh7dGSYUn6+w==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:35cd:: with SMTP id p13mr1405550ejb.172.1595451777099; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:02:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [2003:eb:8f01:3856:4448:aa37:b13c:8450]) by with ESMTPSA id m14sm501188ejx.80.2020. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:02:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: Torsten Lodderstedt <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_129B1EF8-D935-4E0D-9797-ED501BF9754F"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.\))
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 23:02:54 +0200
In-Reply-To: <>
To: Vladimir Dzhuvinov <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Namespacing "type" in RAR
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 21:03:01 -0000

> On 22. Jul 2020, at 22:16, Vladimir Dzhuvinov <> wrote:
> On 21/07/2020 18:43, Torsten Lodderstedt wrote:
>>> On 21. Jul 2020, at 17:40, Vladimir Dzhuvinov <> wrote:
>>> On 21/07/2020 17:47, Justin Richer wrote:
>>>>> On Jul 19, 2020, at 1:04 PM, Vladimir Dzhuvinov <> wrote:
>>>>> On 18/07/2020 17:12, Justin Richer wrote:
>>>>>> I think publishing supported “type” parameters isn’t a bad idea, and it aligns with publishing supported scopes and claims in discovery.
>>>>> If you are a developer, would you like to be able to find out if the authorization_details for a given "type" has a JSON schema and what it looks like?
>>>> I think that would be a nice thing for an AS/API to offer, but I don’t think it should be expected or required here. That might be a good note in the guidance, say that if you use a URI for your “type” field then it would be nice if it resolved to something either human or machine readable. What I don’t want is for us to require every AS to have to resolve these URIs in order to process and understand them. That’s why I’m taking the position of it being a string, and the URI can provide disambiguation in the way you’re talking about below.
>>> We've been thinking about giving developers the possibility to discover the authorization_details JSON schema (if one is supplied) for a given type via a separate AS metadata parameter. Not by making the type a dereferceable URL, which will overload things too much.
>>> authorization_details_json_schemas : {
>>>    "<type-a>" : "<type-a-json-schema-url>",
>>>    "<type-b>" : "<type-b-json-schema-url>",
>>>   ...
>>> }
>>> The rationale -- to minimise the number of potential support calls for providers arising from "Oh dear, why do I get this invalid_request now..." with complex RAR JSON objects.
>> We could borrow the "$schema” element. 
> Could you elaborate?

I mean we could use this element in addition to the “type” element to specify the corresponding schema in each authorization details object.  

>> However, I’m on the fence regarding introducing a separate parameter for the schema simply because it also introduce a new error cause if type and schema are inconsistent. 
> Another idea was to still let the AS be configured with optional JSON
> schemas for each type, and if the schema check of the
> authorization_details fails, to include a meaningful message in the
> invalid_request error_description and the schema URL in the error_uri.
> The downside of that is the schema cannot be discovered or retrieved
> upfront.
> We really want to make it easy for developers to debug their requests
> when facing complex RARs, on their own, without having to rely on a
> support desk.
> IMO the std invalid_request is ok for communicating the condition of an
> authorization_details object failing the schema check (if the additional
> error code was your concern).
> Vladimir
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list