Nat,

>>> All the request parameters MUST be provided through request file.
>>"All" doesn't make much sense if params can still appear in the URI, and 
>>override the file.

> What about this: 
>
> Request parameters SHOULD be provided through request file. 

If it is perfectly legitimate to include some params in the user-url, and those 
override the same params in the file, then there is no point requiring the 
overridden params to be present in the file with a MUST or even a SHOULD. What 
about saying:
"A shorter user-uri is more likely to avoid mobile browser URI length limits, 
and to reduce bandwidth and latency for mobile traffic. Consequently, as many 
parameters as practical should be provided through the request file, instead of 
directly in the user-uri."



>>> The "request_url" MUST be provided in the URL.
>> This isn't really a "MUST", its just indicates if you are using this feature 
>> (this "flow").

> It is a MUST. Without it, you just cannot obtain other required parameters. 

Without it you are using "normal" OAuth2 (all the params in the user-uri), 
which is fine and shouldn't violate a MUST.
If this mechanism is defined in a separate spec then I guess it could be a MUST 
for that spec. Even in that case, though, servers that support request_url 
shouldn't reject interactions with all the params directly in the user-uri.

 

>> Would be good to say "A request_url param MUST NOT be provided in a request 
>> file". Probably good to add "A request file MUST be rejected if it includes 
>> a request_url param".

> request_url param MAY be provided in a request file. It is just its 
> identifier. It probably is best to be there. 

It sounds like you are assuming the request_url in the file is the same as the 
request_url in user-uri that led to the file. The server treats request_url in 
user-uri as a trigger to include more params, but the server treats request_url 
in the file as merely a name for the file (which it ignores because there is 
nothing for the server to do with such a name).

This is inconsistent.

request_url should be an include mechanism, regardless of where it appears. If 
we only want to support an include mechanism in user-uri, and not supported 
nested includes, then we should explicitly say request_url MUST NOT appear in a 
file.

--
James Manger
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Reply via email to