Ah, OK. That's actually reasonable.

2016年1月21日(木) 9:31 nov matake <[email protected]>:

> I prefer “code_challenge_methods_supported”, since the registered
> parameter name is “code_challenge_method”, not “pkce_method".
>
> On Jan 19, 2016, at 11:58, William Denniss <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Seems like we agree this should be added. How should it look?
>
> Two ideas:
>
> "code_challenge_methods_supported": ["plain", "S256"]
>
> or
>
> "pkce_methods_supported": ["plain", "S256"]
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Torsten Lodderstedt <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>>
>> Am 06.01.2016 um 18:25 schrieb William Denniss:
>>
>> +1
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 6:40 AM, John Bradley <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Good point.  Now that PKCE is a RFC we should add it to discovery.
>>>
>>> John B.
>>> > On Jan 6, 2016, at 9:29 AM, Vladimir Dzhuvinov <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I just noticed PKCE support is missing from the discovery metadata.
>>> >
>>> > Is it a good idea to add it?
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> >
>>> > Vladimir
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Vladimir Dzhuvinov
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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 [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
>
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Reply via email to