I vote for (3) unless a good (4) is suggested.

On 2010-06-27, at 6:51 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:

> Over the past year many people expressed concerns about the use of the 
> ‘realm’ WWW-Authenticate header parameter. The parameter is defined in RFC 
> 2617 as required, and is allowed to have scheme-specific structure.
>  
> We have a few options:
>  
> 1. Leave it as required under the definition of RFC 2617 (i.e. provide no 
> help, developers will need to ready 2617 and figure out what to do with it).
> 2. Update 2617 to remove the requirement – this is not going to be easy or 
> possible to predict success.
> 3. Provide specific guidance as to what to do with the realm parameter.
> 4. Something else.
>  
> Comments?
>  
> EHL
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to