[Openid-specs-ab] Spec Call Notes 31-Oct-22
Mike Jones
Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
Tue Nov 1 22:35:41 UTC 2022
Spec Call Notes 31-Oct-22
Mike Jones
Karthik Sivasamy
David Waite (DW)
Naveen CM
Dima Postnikov
Aaron Parecki
JARM Approval Vote
JWT Secured Authorization Response Mode for OAuth 2.0 (JARM)
Up for approval as a final spec
Vote at https://openid.net/foundation/members/polls/286
Pull Requests
https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/pull-requests/
PR #313 fix: removed duplicate word "endpoint" and changed addition to additional
Fixes syntax errors in Native SSO spec
Merged
PR #338 [Errata] Specified the use of CORS at additional endpoints
Fixes #980
This is the last currently open errata PR
Merged (with discussion on the issue as recorded below)
PR #349 feat: [Federation] RS256 not mandatory anymore
Closes #1681
Merged
PR #346 fix: [Federation] trust mark status HTTP method
On the 31-Oct-22 working group call, we agreed to merge this after conflicts are resolved
PR #320 rename to `credential_issuer` from the `issuer` in the Initiate Issuance Request
Ready to merge after conflicts are resolved
Issues
https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues?status=new&status=open
#1681: [Federation] FAPI prohibits RS256
Fixed by PR #349
#980: Where else do we need to specify the use of CORS support?
Fixed by PR #338
We discussed possibly prohibiting the use of CORS on the authorization endpoint in the OAuth Security BCP
Aaron said that he just added a statement about CORS on the token endpoint to the OAuth 2.1 spec
DW distinguished between API endpoints and endpoints visited by the browser
#1700: potentially add a section that explains basics of OAuth 2.0 (perhaps an addendum).
Mike is mostly prone to let OAuth describe itself, but a few sentences of overview would be OK
Aaron Parecki noted that "Basics could grow pretty quickly"
#1699: OIDC4VCI - error response for missing nonce
Mike noted that invalid_or_missing_proof doesn't seem to fit the scenario
#1698: Scope of an Access Token in VCI
This probably needs discussion on a SIOP special topic call
#1697: Server metadata needs to specify supported proof types / algorithms
We looked at this on the 31-Oct-22 working group call. It would probably benefit from discussion on a SIOP special topic call.
#1696: Is proof type flexibility needed?
DW said that the information that needs to be included in the proof will, in general, vary by proof type
IETF in a week in London
Aaron and Mike plan to be there
Next Call
The next call is on Thursday, November 3rd at 7am Pacific Time, followed by a SIOP Special Topic call the following hour
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20221101/69490bce/attachment.html>
More information about the Openid-specs-ab
mailing list