I guess that is a pattern used many scenarios. Requesting client can suggest - but its up to the AS to honor it or not...
Thanks & regards, -prabath On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:43 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > William Mills <[email protected]> 写于 2013-01-21 13:44:45: > > > > Not a problem for the client to request a type, but it may not get it. > > I don't object client requesting a type, but I think it is meaningful only > when the requested type is specified by a RS, > and client just relay that request to AS. > > > > > From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > To: Prabath Siriwardena <[email protected]> > > Cc: "[email protected] WG" <[email protected]>; William Mills > > <[email protected]> > > Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 9:38 PM > > Subject: Re: Re: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Client cannot specify the token type it > needs > > > > > > Well, if RS could specify token type, then Client could transfer it to > AS, > > I think, but it is not a good idea for client itself to specify the > > token type. > > > > > > Prabath Siriwardena <[email protected]> 写于 2013-01-21 13:29:05: > > > > > Think about a distributed setup. You have single Authorization > > > Server and multiple Resource Servers. > > > > > > Although OAuth nicely decouples AS from RS - AFAIK there is no > > > standard established for communication betweens AS and RS - how to > > > declare metadata between those. > > > > > > Also there can be Resource Servers which support multiple token > > > types. It could vary on APIs hosted in a given RS. > > > > > > Thanks & regards, > > > -Prabath > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:48 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > The token type shoulbe decided by resource server, which consumes > > > access token. > > > Client just re-tell the requested token type to AS. > > > Client should not specify the token type. > > > > > > > > > [email protected] 写于 2013-01-21 13:08:39: > > > > > > > > > > This is true. It's possible for the AS to vary it's behavior on > > > > scope name, but it's presumed the AS and RS have an agreement of > > > > what token type is in play. Likely a good extension to the spec. > > > > > > > > > > > From: Prabath Siriwardena <[email protected]> > > > > To: "[email protected] WG" <[email protected]> > > > > Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 7:28 PM > > > > Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Client cannot specify the token type it needs > > > > > > > > > > > Although token type is extensible according to the OAuth core > > > > specification - it is fully governed by the Authorization Server. > > > > > > > > There can be a case where a single AS supports multiple token types > > > > based on client request. > > > > > > > > But currently we don't have a way the client can specify (or at > > > > least suggest) which token type it needs in the OAuth access > > tokenrequest ? > > > > > > > > Is this behavior intentional ? or am I missing something... > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > > > > Prabath > > > > > > > > Mobile : +94 71 809 6732 > > > > > > > > http://blog.facilelogin.com > > > > http://RampartFAQ.com > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > OAuth mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > OAuth mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Thanks & Regards, > > > Prabath > > > > > > Mobile : +94 71 809 6732 > > > > > > http://blog.facilelogin.com > > > http://RampartFAQ.com > > > -- Thanks & Regards, Prabath Mobile : +94 71 809 6732 http://blog.facilelogin.com http://RampartFAQ.com
_______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
