What consensus do you refer to? The WG charter?
regards,
Torsten.
Am 02.08.2010 22:18, schrieb Eran Hammer-Lahav:
No according to WG consensus. We took it all out because too many people
considered it experimental, so while it may be a WG item, it is not part of the
core spes.
EHL
-----Original Message-----
From: Torsten Lodderstedt [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 1:07 PM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: OAuth WG ([email protected])
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Extensibility: new endpoints
and discovery does not belong into the core?
regards,
Torsten.
Am 02.08.2010 22:05, schrieb Eran Hammer-Lahav:
This doesn't belong in core. A registry is used to avoid name collisions, not
to provide an inventory.
Maybe in discovery.
EHL
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Torsten Lodderstedt
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 12:54 PM
To: OAuth WG ([email protected])
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Extensibility: new endpoints
the existing authorization server endpoints (end-user authorization
and tokens endpoint) have a relatively clearly semantics and scope.
Adding distinct new functions to an authorization server will (in my
opionion) require the definition of new endpoints. For example, I'm
working on an I-D for token revocation. Such a function does not fit
into the tokens endpoint since it has become a "token issuance
endpoint" rather than a general purpose client2server endpoint.
I therefore would propose to include the option to define and
register new endpoints into the Extensibility section of the spec.
This would also facilitate the incorporation of additional endpoints
(with well-defined names) into OAuth discovery.
Any thoughts?
regards,
Torsten.
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
