It is only a bug in the sense that the 'POST' limitation was put in there at 
some point without an actual explicit consensus. What this means is that as the 
spec editor I do not have an recollection that we put it there for a reason, 
and it is obviously creating problems. It was not the authors' intentions to 
exclude PUT, DELETE, HEAD, etc.

But since there was never a consensus call here to fix it, the official 
specification is still restricted.

It will take at least 4 months for the IETF specification to reach a stable 
place. If you want to help speed things along please do join the [email protected] 
list. We need more activity there, and raising such issues is exactly what we 
need.

If there is appetite here, we can do a quick errata for Core 1.0a. Should be 
pretty easy to do. I already listed all the known bugs in the history of the 
IETF documents.

EHL

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> Of Hannes Tydén
> Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 3:24 AM
> To: OAuth
> Subject: [oauth] Re: Signing PUT request
> 
> 
> On Sep 17, 9:55 am, Eran Hammer-Lahav <[email protected]> wrote:
> > OAuth Core 1.0 (or a) does *not* include PUT body parameters in the
> signature base string. That is a bug which I already fixed a while back
> in the very first I-D:
> 
> Re-reading you post made me realize that this _is_ a bug is in the 1.0
> spec. What is the outlook to when the spec submitted to the IETF to be
> an official spec?
> 
> Thanks,
> Hannes
> 

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OAuth" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/oauth?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to