[Openid-specs-ab] Issue #891: New core: unnecessary sentence in 2.3.2.1 (openid/connect)

Mike Jones Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
Mon Oct 21 16:25:20 UTC 2013


One of the main reasons that Messages and Standard were so confusing *was* that the code flow, the implicit flow, and they hybrid flows were all jammed together, with lots of conditionals in the text that developers had to sort out.  Now the conditionals are gone - instead replaced by 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3.

The problem with the suggestion that 2.2 and 2.3 be merged is that you'd also have to merge 2.3 into 2.1, because one of the defining characteristics of the hybrid flow is that it uses the Token Endpoint, which is defined in 2.1.  At that point, you'd be back to having all the conditionals we had in Messages and Standard, and we'd lose the value of the reorganization.

                                                            -- Mike

From: openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Nat Sakimura
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 9:02 AM
To: George Fletcher
Cc: nov; openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
Subject: Re: [Openid-specs-ab] Issue #891: New core: unnecessary sentence in 2.3.2.1 (openid/connect)

If that is the case, the sentence should read like "No access token is returned when the value is code id_token from the Authorization Endpoint." The access token is returned from the token endpoint in that case.

The entire "Hybrid Flow" chapter is new, and may need more careful read.
In Messages and Standard, there was nothing called "Hybrid Flow". It was, in a way, combined with other flows.

Since most of the clauses are actually just pointing to the corresponding sections in the implicit flow, we may as well combine them.
Only the additional things needed would be the code and the c_hash handling and the response from the Token endpoint when the response_type includes 'code'.

Cheers,

Nat



2013/10/22 George Fletcher <gffletch at aol.com<mailto:gffletch at aol.com>>
I had the same thought... but then also wondered if it was supposed to be "No Access Token is returned when the value is 'code id_token'" as that is one of the allowed response_types and in this case an Access Token would not be returned.

Thanks,
George
On 10/21/13 3:16 AM, nov wrote:

New issue 891: New core: unnecessary sentence in 2.3.2.1

https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issue/891/new-core-unnecessary-sentence-in-2321



nov:



"No Access Token is returned when the value is 'id_token'"



This sentence shouldnt be needed, since response_type=id_token isn't in the scope of this section.





_______________________________________________

Openid-specs-ab mailing list

Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net<mailto:Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net>

http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab





--
[George Fletcher]<http://connect.me/gffletch>

_______________________________________________
Openid-specs-ab mailing list
Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net<mailto:Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net>
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab



--
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
Chairman, OpenID Foundation
http://nat.sakimura.org/
@_nat_en
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20131021/e7b995d2/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 78938 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20131021/e7b995d2/attachment-0001.png>


More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list