Hi Phil,
>The assumption that client id must be issued by the sp seems wrong to >me in many cases-- including oidc. 6749 does not make this restriction >at all. What do you mean? Grant type code requires a client_id in order to identify the client at the AS's authz endpoint. Based on this data, the AS chooses the authz policy and validates the redirect_uri. > >Given this, a statement approach may be sufficient for many clients. No >need for long term credential mgmt or records. Perhaps for clients using the token endpoint only. regards, Torsten. > >Phil > >On 2013-08-19, at 16:33, Eve Maler <e...@xmlgrrl.com> wrote: > >> Hi folks-- Just a reminder that the first draft the UMA group >submitted on May 1, 2011 contained extensive requirements and use cases >related to UMA's various needs for dynamic client registration: >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hardjono-oauth-dynreg-00 >> >> When there was interest to pick up this draft as a WG work item, it >was recommended that we excise this content so that the doc wouldn't be >so specific to our particular usage of OAuth. >> >> I point this out just to show that the need for dynamic client >registration isn't limited to OpenID Connect, and that some specific >use cases have already been floated here. >> >> FWIW, >> >> Eve >> >> On 19 Aug 2013, at 8:31 AM, Justin Richer <jric...@mitre.org> wrote: >> >>> All of this is a good argument to do both, which is what I've been >saying all along. >>> >>> -- Justin >>> >>> On 08/19/2013 11:33 AM, Phil Hunt wrote: >>>> I do not recall agreement in charter discussions to solving a >specific case. >>>> >>>> I recall more than one in the re-chartering discussion said dyn reg >needed major changes to solve their use cases. >>>> >>>> Phil >>>> >>>> On 2013-08-19, at 8:18, Justin Richer <jric...@mitre.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Tony, I completely disagree. The proposals that I've seen have >different means and different end states, and they make different >assumptions about the relationship between entities and the >capabilities of all players. >>>>> >>>>> -- Justin >>>>> >>>>> On 08/19/2013 11:15 AM, Anthony Nadalin wrote: >>>>>> There are proposals out there that are trying to solve the same >problem, but in different ways, so I would not say that they are trying >to solve different use cases. I do think that we need to make sure that >whatever proposal we select it needs to have a wide range of use cases >it solves, not just a single use case as the more solutions this group >produces the more confused folks will be >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On >Behalf Of Justin Richer >>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 7:27 AM >>>>>> To: Phil Hunt >>>>>> Cc: oauth mailing list >>>>>> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Conference >Call: Thu 22 Aug, 2pm PDT >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree that dynamic registration isn't needed to solve *all* of >the different use cases. It solves its set of specific problems (and >does so well, if you ask me), but there are and will always be things >that it won't work for, and that's fine. That's why I've suggested >under a separate thread that the other drafts go forward separately and >that DynReg not be hung up on them. We're fundamentally solving >different use cases, and there is no magic solution that will solve all >the problems at once. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- Justin >>>>>> >>>>>> On 08/18/2013 08:15 PM, Phil Hunt wrote: >>>>>>> I think we should start by reviewing use cases taxonomy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Then a discussion on any client_id assumptions and actual >requirements for each client case. Why is registration needed for each >case? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The statement can solve some complication but should be put in >context of use cases. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Phil >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2013-08-18, at 15:01, Hannes Tschofenig ><hannes.tschofe...@gmx.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>>>>> Hash: SHA512 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>>>>> Hash: SHA512 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Based on your feedback via the poll let us start with August >22nd with the first conference call. I will distribute the conference >call details on Tuesday. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Let us talk about the agenda. There were several items brought >up in >>>>>>>> discussions, namely >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Software assertions / software statements >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We briefly discussed this topic at the IETF OAuth session but >we may need more time to understand the implications for the current >dynamic client registration document: >>>>>>>> >http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-oauth-2.pptx >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * SCIM vs. current dynamic client registration approach for >>>>>>>> interacting with the client configuration endpoint >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In the past we said that it would be fine to have a profile >defined in SCIM to provide the dynamic client registration for those >who implement SCIM and want to manage clients also using SCIM. It >might, however, be useful to compare the two approaches in detail to >see what the differences are. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Interactions with the client registration endpoint >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Justin added some "life cycle" description to the document to >motivate some of the design decisions. Maybe we need to discuss those >in more detail and add further text. >>>>>>>> Additional text could come from the NIST Blue Button / Green >Button usage. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Aspects that allow servers to store less / no state >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - - From the discussions on the list it was not clear whether >this is actually accomplishable with the current version of OAuth. We >could explore this new requirement and try to get a better >understanding how much this relates to dynamic client registration and >to what extend it requires changes to the core spec. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What would you like to start with? Other topics you would like >to bring up? >>>>>>>> - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >>>>>>>> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin) >>>>>>>> Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJSEULvAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtttEH/Aogg8Q/R/L9/mzU05IQbnze >>>>>>>> >AdXB1ZvySkV3jZT4I5shmP7hQr6mc6P6UdvyOrSjrvPlBHen55/oa5z7Cwchd1dk >>>>>>>> >dcDUEavbodjnm9SrOs0nKaTvdeZimFSBkGMrfhoTYLXpymP24F9PZgwUXdOcFocF >>>>>>>> >OiCs3qDajYaA395DCg5+4mOLQQgDnmy4drlgj2NPv1nMBRDBubzgAhJccwF2BLN9 >>>>>>>> >IW7MAwTEu7vYT/gwIFzriPkui7gYpf8sAqsnzf/z7FtXbsP8imgOKUlQxzZzeSSP >>>>>>>> >QEb6+syyMD9Gt6wxQfWzyl5T0bYLP6DQ+ldZR8yGKCwb+2k3LN6Q8bIpj4mIERI= >>>>>>>> =tkGT >>>>>>>> - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >>>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >>>>>>>> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin) >>>>>>>> Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJSEUQfAAoJEGhJURNOOiAt8wkIAI3xgdsWuOB36KLiMLRUG+Zb >>>>>>>> >RvYqV+rOH80m7YVJcdOLjQJcpPqOIBdzq/yuNiAaF1uFJCqBn97ZQ/NLXLNGcg8x >>>>>>>> >wI/Laz7kP2U4B2trBTMtAf2wsY9uYw4Eh+eOEDKGF6cmkEzrzrlw4q/Sfu6vy181 >>>>>>>> >VI+kqwzZ+iYX4iL3NYPlkg3rwF4OZ1v3T08Erg2SPrbmNd1TRfJJU8HrYFEJQo1q >>>>>>>> >p0RiLjcFFDCEZs0gDr9zliCXllV7J9h2ttqLq8+xwPATDuO6buQdFS9vZQ8t1u36 >>>>>>>> >a0FIuy3NM8PQbblC3B5WumUjW4kntLV09ytYV8h6S8C/dgFwMqzAwEAeNx1exyE= >>>>>>>> =3qNI >>>>>>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> 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 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OAuth mailing list >>> OAuth@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth >> >> >> Eve Maler >http://www.xmlgrrl.com/blog >> +1 425 345 6756 >http://www.twitter.com/xmlgrrl >> >_______________________________________________ >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
