On 5/1/12 5:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote: > I’m editing the JWT spec to prepare for the OAuth WG version and to > track changes in the JOSE specs. Currently the “typ” values defined for > JWT tokens are “JWT” and “http://openid.net/specs/jwt/1.0” (see > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-json-web-token-08#section-5). I > believe that the URN value should be changed to use a URN taken from the > OAuth URN namespace urn:ietf:params:oauth (defined in > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns-02). > > > > I propose to use the URN:^ > > urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:jwt > > > > I believe this fits well with the other four uses of this namespace to date: > > urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:saml2-bearer > > urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer > > urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:jwt-bearer > > urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:jwt-bearer > > > > (The first two are from > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-11. The latter > two are from http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-oauth-jwt-bearer-04.) > > > > Do people agree with this URN choice?
Looks fine to me. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
