Already in -10.
EHL
On Jul 14, 2010, at 14:46, Rob Richards rricha...@cdatazone.org wrote:
Finally getting a chance to catchup and respond to this thread.
Marius Scurtescu wrote:
See comments bellow...
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Stefanie Dronia sdro...@gmx.de wrote:
Hallo
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Rob Richards rricha...@cdatazone.org wrote:
Finally getting a chance to catchup and respond to this thread.
Marius Scurtescu wrote:
See comments bellow...
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Stefanie Dronia sdro...@gmx.de wrote:
Hallo Marius,
thanks for
at the latest, the resource server doesn't support OAuth 1 anymore.
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 21:54:16 -0700
Von: Marius Scurtescu mscurte...@google.com
An: Rob Richards rricha...@cdatazone.org
CC: oauth@ietf.org oauth@ietf.org
Betreff: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
[Replying to everything at once...]
-Original Message-
From: Rob Richards [mailto:rricha...@cdatazone.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:43 AM
Exactly. While
-Original Message-
From: Rob Richards [mailto:rricha...@cdatazone.org]
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 4:05 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
[Replying to everything at once...]
-Original Message-
From: Rob
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav e...@hueniverse.com wrote:
Hi Rob,
-Original Message-
From: Rob Richards [mailto:rricha...@cdatazone.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 3:26 AM
To: OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org); Eran Hammer-Lahav
Subject: Versioning
Versioning is
(oauth@ietf.org)
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
Hi Rob,
-Original Message-
From: Rob Richards [mailto:rricha...@cdatazone.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 3:26 AM
To: OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org); Eran Hammer-Lahav
Subject: Versioning
Versioning is still something
Message-
From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org]
On Behalf Of Marius Scurtescu
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 10:37 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav
e
: Thursday, July 01, 2010 10:49 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav; Rob Richards; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
My feeling on this is that versioning explicitly in the protocol adds clarity
and
some small level of compatibility. Different auth and token endpoints are
easy, what's
[mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Eran Hammer-Lahav
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 10:57 AM
To: Marius Scurtescu
Cc: OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
-Original Message-
From: Marius Scurtescu [mailto:mscurte...@google.com]
Sent: Thursday
Basic
for client credentials, not to log-in an end-user.
EHL
-Original Message-
From: William Mills [mailto:wmi...@yahoo-inc.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:08 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav; Rob Richards; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
Why is using the string Token
-Original Message-
From: Marius Scurtescu [mailto:mscurte...@google.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:16 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: William Mills; Rob Richards; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav
e
; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav
e...@hueniverse.com wrote:
Why is a version better than a new scheme name?
Sure, but then make the scheme more specific. What will the
scheme name be for OAuth 3?
When tokens are passed
Message-
From: William Mills [mailto:wmi...@yahoo-inc.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:08 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav; Rob Richards; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
Why is using the string Token better than OAuth2? 1.0 used Oauth.
If it's purely a question of aesthetics
EHL
-Original Message-
From: William Mills [mailto:wmi...@yahoo-inc.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 10:49 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav; Rob Richards; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
My feeling on this is that versioning explicitly in the protocol adds
: William Mills; Rob Richards; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav
e...@hueniverse.com wrote:
I think HTTP authentication schemes should be generally useful. In this
case, OAuth defines a few ways to obtain an token, and a few ways
Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Marius Scurtescu [mailto:mscurte...@google.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 10:37 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: Rob Richards; OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Eran Hammer
-Original Message-
From: Marius Scurtescu [mailto:mscurte...@google.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:36 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: William Mills; Rob Richards; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav
e
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:42 AM, William Mills wmi...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Marius Scurtescu [mailto:mscurte...@google.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:36 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: William Mills; Rob Richards; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG
-
From: Eran Hammer-Lahav [mailto:e...@hueniverse.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:42 AM
To: Marius Scurtescu
Cc: William Mills; Rob Richards; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
It was and this approach was rejected by this group as
confusing. At this point, it's
Message-
From: Marius Scurtescu [mailto:mscurte...@google.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:16 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: William Mills; Rob Richards; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav
e...@hueniverse.com
...@google.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:36 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: William Mills; Rob Richards; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav
e...@hueniverse.com wrote:
If you would like to discuss a version
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Justin Richer jric...@mitre.org wrote:
OAuth tokens as a form-encoded element in a post body? Yes. Keep it.
Just curious. What use case would require that the access token is put
in the post body as opposed to an http header when accessing a
protected resource?
OAuth tokens as a form-encoded element in a post body? Yes. Keep it.
Just curious. What use case would require that the access token is put
in the post body as opposed to an http header when accessing a
protected resource?
If nothing else, it parallels the use case of a GET-style query
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Justin Richer jric...@mitre.org wrote:
OAuth tokens as a form-encoded element in a post body? Yes. Keep it.
Just curious. What use case would require that the access token is put
in the post body as opposed to an http header when accessing a
protected
The rest of the parameters being in the body.
EHL
-Original Message-
From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Marius Scurtescu
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 12:26 PM
To: Justin Richer
Cc: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
On Thu
[Replying to everything at once...]
-Original Message-
From: Marius Scurtescu [mailto:mscurte...@google.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:36 AM
Not sure about the future, but looking at OAuth 1 vs OAuth 2. A protected
resource request filter may want to decide early what
-Lahav
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 2:24 PM
To: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
[Replying to everything at once...]
-Original Message-
From: Marius Scurtescu [mailto:mscurte...@google.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:36 AM
Not sure about the future
]
On Behalf Of William Mills
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 2:36 PM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Versioning
In re:
1. Token syntax
2. Presence of 'oauth_signature_method'
3. Presence of 'oauth_signature'
4. Presence of no other 'oauth_
29 matches
Mail list logo
