I'm currently finishing an extension spec for client-to-client access 
delegation based on the assertion profile.  I believe it will use the client 
secret and return a refresh token, because the assertion is meant to be 
temporary, at least in its current form.  If the assertions are moving in a 
different direction I will need to refactor to follow suit.  (btw, expect a url 
to my draft by the end of the week, I hope)
----
-- Justin Hart
-- [email protected]






On Jul 7, 2010, at 3:18 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:

> I don't have time to go dig through the list archive.
> 
> 
> On 7/7/10 2:02 PM, "Brian Eaton" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>> It is pretty much the same as originally proposed. Any recent changes are an
>>> oversight, not any intentional change. Since it was proposed, the only
>>> change made (with full consensus) was to allow client authentication as an
>>> optional request parameter, as well as allow a refresh token as an optional
>>> response parameter.
>> 
>> Can you point me to the e-mail threads that reached consensus on using
>> client authentication?
> 
> This was requested a few months ago and was included in -05 as optional. I
> did not see any feedback requesting to remove this.
> 
>> Can you point me to the e-mail threads that reached consensus on
>> returning a refresh token?
> 
> I raised this a long time ago about making the token endpoint output
> consistent across all request types. At the time, consensus was that there
> was no reason not to allow it, but that in general is should not be done
> (refresh token when using assertions).
> 
> The current language has a SHOULD NOT issue a refresh token. It is not a
> MUST NOT because someone recently asked for the ability to issue a refresh
> token when the client nature prevents it from retaining the original
> assertion used.
> 
> If you have an objection to the SHOULD NOT (vs. MUST NOT), please raise it
> the the group will discuss.
> 
> EHL
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

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

Reply via email to