Re: [OAUTH-WG] [EXTERNAL] Re: OAuth 2.0 DPoP for the Implicit Flow

2020-03-11 Thread Brian Campbell
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:21 AM Mike Jones wrote: > I haven’t thought about PAR but would welcome thoughts. In general, I > assume that the “htu” value should be the actual endpoint used. What do > others think? > Yeah, in general, the “htu” and "htm" values should probably be related to the

Re: [OAUTH-WG] [EXTERNAL] Re: OAuth 2.0 DPoP for the Implicit Flow

2020-03-10 Thread Mike Jones
I haven’t thought about PAR but would welcome thoughts. In general, I assume that the “htu” value should be the actual endpoint used. What do others think? Yes, I agree that the DPoP parameters on the front channel should only apply to the front-channel access token, whereas if you’re using a

Re: [OAUTH-WG] [EXTERNAL] Re: OAuth 2.0 DPoP for the Implicit Flow

2020-03-10 Thread Mike Jones
Answering Rifaat’s question, per Brian’s comment https://github.com/danielfett/draft-dpop/issues/37#issuecomment-534192398, at IETF 105 there was consensus to at least initially do this work in a separate draft. -- Mike From: Aaron Parecki