Opened 8 years ago

Closed 7 years ago

#334 closed design (fixed)

recipient behavior for new auth parameters

Reported by: julian.reschke@… Owned by: julian.reschke@…
Priority: normal Milestone: 19
Component: p7-auth Severity: Active WG Document
Keywords: Cc:

Description

Should we state the default behavior for extension auth-params? Is it "must-ignore"?

Should we recommend that new schemes establish procedures for defining new parameters?

Attachments (2)

334.diff​ (1.1 KB) - added by julian.reschke@… 8 years ago.
Proposed patch
334.2.diff​ (1.3 KB) - added by julian.reschke@… 8 years ago.
Proposed patch

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (10)

comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by mnot@…

I'd say we shouldn't specify a default, but should document it as a consideration for new schemes.

comment:2 Changed 8 years ago by mnot@…

  • Milestone changed from unassigned to 19

comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@…

  • Owner changed from draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth@… to julian.reschke@…

comment:4 Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@…

  • Status changed from new to assigned

Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@…

Proposed patch

Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@…

Proposed patch

comment:5 Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@…

From [1562]:

Recommend to consider treatment of extension parameters in new scheme definitions (see #334)

comment:6 Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@…

  • Resolution set to incorporated
  • Status changed from assigned to closed

comment:7 Changed 7 years ago by mnot@…

  • Resolution incorporated deleted
  • Status changed from closed to reopened

comment:8 Changed 7 years ago by mnot@…

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from reopened to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.