External, out-of-band, implicit. It cannot be client because that is not always the case.
EHL On Jul 16, 2010, at 12:40, Marius Scurtescu <mscurte...@google.com> wrote: > I agree that grant_type=none is confusing. "client" or "direct" sound better. > > Marius > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Justin Richer <jric...@mitre.org> wrote: >> The choice of the value "none" for the grant_type parameter in the >> client-credentials case is confusing. I understand the philosophy behind >> this choice, but I think that calling it "none" here gives the wrong >> impression. It almost sounds like it's a deny-request on first glance, >> or even a revoke request of some type. Furthermore, I'd say that there >> really is an access grant being made here, but it's implicit, and given >> to the client directly and not to an end user. >> >> I propose we change this key to "client", "implicit", "direct", or >> something other than "none" to avoid this kind of confusion. Along with >> this, I would also like the paragraph in 4.1 describing the usage of >> this grant type to be pulled into its own (admittedly short) subsection. >> In this way, someone looking to implement this style of auth will have >> somewhere concrete to look, bringing this method on par with others in >> section 4.1. >> >> -- Justin >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OAuth mailing list >> OAuth@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth >> > _______________________________________________ > OAuth mailing list > OAuth@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
