Yes sorry.   code_challenge_method is the query parameter so 
code_challenge_methods_supported


> On Jan 25, 2016, at 6:12 PM, William Denniss <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 6:17 AM, John Bradley <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> The code_challenge and code_challenge_method parameter names predate calling 
> the spec PKCE.  
> 
> Given that some of us deployed early versions of PKCE in products and 
> opensource to mitigate the problem before the spec was completed we decided 
> not to rename the parameter names from code_verifier_method to 
> pkce_verifier_method.  
> 
> For consistency we should stick with code_verifier_methods_supported in 
> discovery.
> 
> To clarify, did you mean "code_challenge_methods_supported"?  That is, 
> building on the param name "code_challenge_method" from Section 4.3 
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7636#section-4.3>?
>  
> 
> John B.
> 
>> On Jan 21, 2016, at 3:12 AM, William Denniss <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>> "code_challenge_methods_supported" definitely works for me.
>> 
>> Any objections to moving forward with that? I would like to update our 
>> discovery doc shortly.
>> 
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Nat Sakimura <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> Ah, OK. That's actually reasonable. 
>> 
>> 2016年1月21日(木) 9:31 nov matake <[email protected] <mailto:[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] 
>>> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] 
>>>> <mailto:[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] 
>>>> > <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth 
>>>> > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OAuth mailing list
>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth 
>>>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OAuth mailing list
>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth 
>>>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OAuth mailing list
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth 
>>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth 
>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth 
>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>
> 
> 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

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

Reply via email to