> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marius Scurtescu [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 11:57 AM
> To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
> Cc: Manger, James H; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 Bearer Token specification draft -01
> 
> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > This is not how most HTTP authentication frameworks work (that was the
> conclusion from my HTTP Token scheme proposal a year ago). Most
> frameworks rather switch on the scheme name, not on a parameter inside
> the header.
> 
> The alternative, as suggested by James, requires a new scheme for each
> token type. My guess is that we will have quite a few types pretty
> soon:
> - bearer opaque
> - bearer transparent (JSON, signed by authz server)
> - JWT signed
> - MAC
> - etc.
> 
> Who controls the auth header scheme names? Aren't we asking for a
> collision here?

Nah. It's a proposed registry and has never been very active.

EHL

> Marius
> 
> 
> >
> > EHL
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> > Of Marius Scurtescu
> > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 4:27 PM
> > To: Manger, James H
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 Bearer Token specification draft -01
> >
> > How about:
> > - keeping the scheme "OAuth2", for both WWW-Authenticate and
> > Authorization
> > - define both as name/value pairs (WWW-Authenticate is already)
> > - require that one of the pairs be "type=<token-type>"
> >
> > For example:
> > WWW-Authenticate: OAuth2 type=bearer
> > Authorization: OAuth2 token=vF9dft4qmT, type=bearer
> >
> > Marius
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 7:59 PM, Manger, James H
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Eran,
> >>
> >>> What does scheme=basic mean [in a token response]?
> >>
> >> It means this token response contains credentials that can be used with
> the HTTP BASIC authentication scheme. Don't try to use the credentials with
> any other scheme. The access_token value would be used as the user-id,
> and the token_secret value as the password.
> >>
> >>
> >>> I think tying type and scheme together is less intuitive then
> >>> letting the type definition provide the right scheme(s).
> >>
> >> Keeping them separate offers an additional degree of indirection.
> >> Indirection is sometimes useful, but I don't think it adds any value here.
> >> It just means we need another registry (of token_types, with associated
> procedures); and we need an extra spec for each authentication mechanism
> to define the linkage to OAuth2.
> >>
> >> A lot of authentication mechanisms take similar inputs (an id and a secret)
> so they shouldn't each need a separate spec to define their binding to
> OAuth2.
> >>
> >>
> >>> I am using 'MAC' for my draft.
> >>
> >> As the token_type? As the HTTP authentication scheme? I hope both.
> >>
> >>> But its still an OAuth2 extension, not a completely generic HTTP scheme.
> >>
> >> I guess it is an OAuth2 extension in as much as it defines how to get MAC
> credentials from an OAuth2 token response: check token_type=MAC;
> access_token is the id; token_secret is the MAC key; mac_algorithm is the
> MAC algorithm.
> >>
> >>> It can be used independent of OAuth2 if you somehow got a token,
> >>> secret, and mac algorithm name.
> >>
> >> Hopefully you define a "WWW-Authenticate: MAC ..." response header
> that can list acceptable MAC algorithms.
> >> I think an OAuth2 token response for a MAC scheme should contain the
> same information as the WWW-Authenticate response header for the MAC
> scheme, plus the credentials to use (id & secret) and the OAuth2-specific
> lifetime management bits (eg how/when to refresh). We should explicitly
> define (in core) how to put a WWW-Authenticate header into a token
> response.
> >>
> >> --
> >> James Manger
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OAuth mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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