- From: Yutaka OIWA <y.oiwa@aist.go.jp>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 05:04:57 +0900
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Dear Julian,
Yes, I know the existence of that important text.
So, I am enough satisfied even with the current name, too.
Thank you.
2012/7/19 Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>:
> Point taken, but in the end what's important is the prose, and that already
> says:
>
> "The "token68" notation was introduced for compatibility with existing
> authentication schemes and can only be used once per challenge/credentials.
> New schemes thus ought to use the "auth-param" syntax instead, because
> otherwise future extensions will be impossible."
>
> (and yes, the OAuth bearer spec ignores that advice)
--
Yutaka OIWA, Ph.D. Leader, Software Reliability Research Group
Research Institute for Secure Systems (RISEC)
National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST)
Mail addresses: <y.oiwa@aist.go.jp>, <yutaka@oiwa.jp>
OpenPGP: id[440546B5] fp[7C9F 723A 7559 3246 229D 3139 8677 9BD2 4405 46B5]
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2012 20:05:41 UTC