IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [webfinger] Server Response language

'Stephane Bortzmeyer' <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Wed, 10 July 2013 06:23 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D93D21F9D96 for <webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 23:23:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.532
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTTP_ESCAPED_HOST=0.134, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RMFmNA-uKKJf for <webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 23:23:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.bortzmeyer.org (aetius.bortzmeyer.org [217.70.190.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4990B21F9E6B for <webfinger@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 23:23:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id A9DFE3B5FC; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 06:23:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A04A9199251; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:18:43 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:18:43 +0200
From: 'Stephane Bortzmeyer' <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
Message-ID: <20130710061843.GA15182@sources.org>
References: <044501cddece$fd045040$f70cf0c0$@packetizer.com> <CAHBU6itveCHU+M4A1msr_YQdW9JcrVNmfOmcjFwacLkE-pAYrA@mail.gmail.com> <048401cdded8$605d6c90$211845b0$@packetizer.com> <CAHBU6it45YFr6A+AUm3ub1roXqP99QG4jnEWpbvZew5ejhXt2Q@mail.gmail.com> <04c701cddedc$3f996000$becc2000$@packetizer.com> <20130708204135.GB30054@sources.org> <035e01ce7c59$4fd2ed40$ef78c7c0$@packetizer.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <035e01ce7c59$4fd2ed40$ef78c7c0$@packetizer.com>
X-Transport: UUCP rules
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 7.1
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Server Response language
X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area <webfinger.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/webfinger>, <mailto:webfinger-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webfinger>
List-Post: <mailto:webfinger@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:webfinger-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger>, <mailto:webfinger-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 06:23:19 -0000

On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 12:03:46AM -0400,
 Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote 
 a message of 64 lines which said:

>    If the "resource" parameter is a value for which the server has no
>    information, the server MUST indicate that it was unable to match
>    the request as per Section 10.4.5 of RFC 2616.
> 
> This allows the use of 404 or 410, as appropriate.  I think that is the
> right thing to do.

An aternative, if people insist that it is clear in RFC 3986 and that
it should not be restated in Webfinger, is to provide an example:

For instance, in the OpenID COnnect example, at the end of 3.1, add:

And if the account does not exist:

     GET /.well-known/webfinger?
            resource=acct%3Adoesnotexist%40example.com&
            rel=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fconnect%2F1.0%2Fissuer
            HTTP/1.1
     Host: example.com

   The server might respond like this:

     HTTP/1.1 404 Not found
     Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *

   Without a body.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email