Another +1 for "dynamic introduction".
Putting the required details (eg user authz URI) in a 401 HTTP WWW-Authenticate 
header feels like a better approach to me than XRD in this instance.

At the moment in the OAuth 2 draft (and in WRAP) identical 401 responses can 
mean:
1. Send the user to an authz server to authorize you.
2. Make a request to another server to swap your long term credentials for 
temporary ones.
3. Refresh your credentials at another server.
4. Authentication failed, go away.
This does not feel like a web-style approach.

--
James Manger


----------
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John 
Panzer
Sent: Monday, 22 March 2010 6:54 AM
To: Eve Maler
Cc: OAuth WG
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] First draft of OAuth 2.0

+1 to ensuring that dynamic introduction is possible.  I see a lot of
discussions that end up saying that this or that can be spec'd in the
server docs and the client hard coded to the docs; this is fine for
some features but not for very general ones that everybody needs to
use.
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Reply via email to