Hi Nat,
We currently have 5 new items proposed for the new charter. That's quite a lot and I expect resistance from the IESG (given our previous history of being somewhat slow with our work). If you want a new item something else has to be dropped instead. Anything you do not find as important as the draft you mention below? Ciao Hannes From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext Nat Sakimura Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 10:47 AM To: Anthony Nadalin Cc: oauth@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Looks good but I would like the group to consider the capability of signing the request to be added. See http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sakimura-oauth-requrl-01 It basically adds capability of signing the request in the form of JWS. =nat On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Anthony Nadalin <tony...@microsoft.com> wrote: Agree contents looks good Sent from my Windows Phone ________________________________ From: Igor Faynberg Sent: 3/14/2012 4:26 PM To: oauth@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Looks good and comprehensive to me. Igor On 3/14/2012 4:21 PM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > So, here is a proposal: > > ------- > > Web Authorization Protocol (oauth) > > Description of Working Group > > The Web Authorization (OAuth) protocol allows a user to grant > a third-party Web site or application access to the user's protected > resources, without necessarily revealing their long-term credentials, > or even their identity. For example, a photo-sharing site that supports > OAuth could allow its users to use a third-party printing Web site to > print their private pictures, without allowing the printing site to > gain full control of the user's account and without having the user > sharing his or her photo-sharing sites' long-term credential with the > printing site. > > The OAuth protocol suite encompasses > * a procedure for allowing a client to discover a resource server, > * a protocol for obtaining authorization tokens from an authorization > server with the resource owner's consent, > * protocols for presenting these authorization tokens to protected > resources for access to a resource, and > * consequently for sharing data in a security and privacy respective way. > > In April 2010 the OAuth 1.0 specification, documenting pre-IETF work, > was published as an informational document (RFC 5849). With the > completion of OAuth 1.0 the working group started their work on OAuth 2.0 > to incorporate implementation experience with version 1.0, additional > use cases, and various other security, readability, and interoperability > improvements. An extensive security analysis was conducted and the result > is available as a stand-alone document offering guidance for audiences > beyond the community of protocol implementers. > > The working group also developed security schemes for presenting authorization > tokens to access a protected resource. This led to the publication of > the bearer token as well as the message authentication code (MAC) access > authentication specification. > > OAuth 2.0 added the ability to trade a SAML assertion against an OAUTH token with > the SAML 2.0 bearer assertion profile. This offers interworking with existing > identity management solutions, in particular SAML based deployments. > > OAuth has enjoyed widespread adoption by the Internet application service provider > community. To build on this success we aim for nothing more than to make OAuth the > authorization framework of choice for any Internet protocol. Consequently, the > ongoing standardization effort within the OAuth working group is focused on > enhancing interoperability of OAuth deployments. While the core OAuth specification > truly is an important building block it relies on other specifications in order to > claim completeness. Luckily, these components already exist and have been deployed > on the Internet. Through the IETF standards process they will be improved in > quality and will undergo a rigorous review process. > > Goals and Milestones > > [Editor's Note: Here are the completed items.] > > Done Submit 'OAuth 2.0 Threat Model and Security Considerations' as a working group item > Done Submit 'HTTP Authentication: MAC Authentication' as a working group item > Done Submit 'The OAuth 2.0 Protocol: Bearer Tokens' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard > Done Submit 'The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard > > [Editor's Note: Finishing existing work. Double-check the proposed dates - are they realistic?] > > Jun. 2012 Submit 'HTTP Authentication: MAC Authentication' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard > Apr. 2012 Submit 'SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Profiles for OAuth 2.0' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard > Apr. 2012 Submit 'OAuth 2.0 Assertion Profile' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard > Apr. 2012 Submit 'An IETF URN Sub-Namespace for OAuth' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard > May 2012 Submit 'OAuth 2.0 Threat Model and Security Considerations' to the IESG for consideration as an Informational RFC > > [Editor's Note: New work for the group. 5 items maximum! ] > > Aug. 2012 Submit 'Token Revocation' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard > > [Starting point for the work will be http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lodderstedt-oauth-revocation/] > > Nov. 2012 Submit 'JSON Web Token (JWT)' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard > > [Starting point for the work will be http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-json-web-token] > > Nov. 2012 Submit 'JSON Web Token (JWT) Bearer Token Profiles for OAuth 2.0' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard > > [Starting point for the work will be http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-oauth-jwt-bearer] > > Jan. 2013 Submit 'OAuth Dynamic Client Registration Protocol' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard > > [Starting point for the work will be http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hardjono-oauth-dynreg] > > Sep. 2012 Submit 'OAuth Use Cases' to the IESG for consideration as an Informational RFC > > [Starting point for the work will be http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zeltsan-oauth-use-cases] > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Nat Sakimura (=nat) Chairman, OpenID Foundation http://nat.sakimura.org/ @_nat_en
_______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
