On 2012-01-25 01:03, Mike Jones wrote:
Per the discussion at
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg08040.html, the working
group's rationale for supporting quoted-string but not token syntax for these
parameters, and for requiring that backslash ('\') quoting not be used when
producing them is as follows:
"Once again, the current text reflects a consensus decision of the working group.
It was viewed that requiring support for multiple ways of doing the same thing
unnecessarily complicated implementations without any compensating benefit; better to
support one syntax for each semantic operation and require all implementations to use
it."
Mike, you continue to ignore that WWW-Authenticate needs to be processed
by generic parsers, as a single instance can contain challenges for
different schemes.
If you disagree with the text below:
o The parsing of challenges and credentials is defined by this
specification, and cannot be modified by new authentication
schemes. When the auth-param syntax is used, all parameters ought
to support both token and quoted-string syntax, and syntactical
constraints ought to be defined on the field value after parsing
(i.e., quoted-string processing). This is necessary so that
recipients can use a generic parser that applies to all
authentication schemes.
(which is from the text defining the registry you are using), then
please come over to the HTTPbis WG and ask for a change. It's
work-in-progress.
Despite Julian's remarks below, the syntax in the Bearer spec *is* compatible
with standard parameter parsers, and so no interoperability problems are
created by restricting the parameter syntax to a subset of the syntax allowed
by HTTPbis. No non-standard code is needed to use parameters in the manner
described in the Bearer spec.
That is not true. Using standard components will cause recipients to
accept invalid field instances, which *is* an interoperability problem.
This has happened before: RFC 2617 states that the realm parameter needs
to be quoted, but we see that all browsers accept the token form as well
(<http://greenbytes.de/tech/tc/httpauth/#simplebasictok>). That's not a
surprise because it's the natural thing to do with a generic parser.
Please don't add to the mess. In particular when there really is no
reason to do so. All I heard from you is: "we prefer it that way". I'm
sorry, but that's not sufficient.
...
Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf