>> The changes introduced in Draft 29 had unintended consequences on
>> parts of the spec caused by Sec 4.3,  4.4 and 6 referencing Sec 3.2.1
>> as part of client authentication.

> this change breaks 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer/
and https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer/


An underlying cause of this issue is that a single URI (the token endpoint) is 
overloaded for a dozen different tasks by a bunch of specs — and the list of 
tasks is still growing.

OAuth2 has built a RPC-style API, but almost pretends not to have done so by 
using grant_type names/URIs and a parameter registry instead of a more formal 
SOAP-style structure.

John’s proposed note to the RFC editor should address the immediate issue. 
Perhaps future enhancements, though, could consider a more RESTful approach. I 
think that would significantly clarify some of the complexities OAuth2 grapples 
with and minimise clashes between the various flows.

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

Reply via email to