During the meeting in Berlin Tony voiced concern about a use case he had
for token exchange. Honestly, it's still not entirely clear to me what that
use case is or what would need to change in support of it. I'd like to
better understand the use case and see if it's something that can
reasonably be accommodated with Token Exchange. During the meeting Tony
referred back to an earlier email where he said, "want_composite is not
really the effect we are looking for since it provides for a single token,
the use case we have is where you want the ability to use the subject_token
and the actor_token in combination and not as a composite of only the
claims."

The want_composite parameter came about during some iterative work on the
document (between I-D publications) last year. At first the client could
express that it wanted a composite token, one containing delegation
semantics, with the inclusion of the actor_token parameter. One of the
other editors suggested, however, that the actor_token token might be
necessary for authorization in cases even when the client wasn't asking for
a composite token and that placing the desire for delegation semantics on
it was overloading the parameter too much. I introduced the want_composite
parameter to give the client such a signal independent of the actor_token
parameter. My (admittedly incomplete) understanding of WS-Trust is that the
client/requester can make such an indication and I was trying to follow
that model. However, I'm not sure it's needed or even makes much much
sense. Ultimately it's the server's decision about how to construct the
issued token and what to include in it. It is the server's policy, not a
client signal, which makes the determination. So the want_composite
parameter is really just noise that makes the spec longer. And, from the
quote above, seems might also lead some readers to incorrect conclusions
about what can and cannot be returned in a token exchange.

I'd propose then that the want_composite parameter be dropped from the
document.
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Reply via email to