draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-05.txt   draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-06.txt 
OAuth Working Group M.B. Jones OAuth Working Group M. Jones
Internet-Draft Microsoft Internet-Draft Microsoft
Intended status: Standards Track B. Campbell Intended status: Standards Track B. Campbell
Expires: September 30, 2013 Ping Identity Expires: January 15, 2014 Ping Identity
C. Mortimore C. Mortimore
Salesforce Salesforce
March 29, 2013 July 14, 2013
JSON Web Token (JWT) Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and JSON Web Token (JWT) Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and
Authorization Grants Authorization Grants
draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-05 draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-06
Abstract Abstract
This specification defines the use of a JSON Web Token (JWT) Bearer This specification defines the use of a JSON Web Token (JWT) Bearer
Token as a means for requesting an OAuth 2.0 access token as well as Token as a means for requesting an OAuth 2.0 access token as well as
for use as a means of client authentication. for use as a means of client authentication.
Status of This Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 30, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 15, 2014.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. HTTP Parameter Bindings for Transporting Assertions . . . . . 4 2. HTTP Parameter Bindings for Transporting Assertions . . . . . 4
2.1. Using JWTs as Authorization Grants . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. Using JWTs as Authorization Grants . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Using JWTs for Client Authentication . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2. Using JWTs for Client Authentication . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. JWT Format and Processing Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. JWT Format and Processing Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. Authorization Grant Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.1. Authorization Grant Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2. Client Authentication Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2. Client Authentication Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Authorization Grant Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4. Authorization Grant Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Interoperability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. Interoperability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.1. Sub-Namespace Registration of urn:ietf:params:oauth 7.1. Sub-Namespace Registration of
:grant-type:jwt-bearer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:jwt-bearer . . . . . . . 10
7.2. Sub-Namespace Registration of urn:ietf:params:oauth 7.2. Sub-Namespace Registration of
:client-assertion-type:jwt-bearer . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:jwt-bearer . . 10
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Appendix B. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Appendix B. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
JSON Web Token (JWT) [JWT] is a JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) JSON Web Token (JWT) [JWT] is a JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)
[RFC4627] based security token encoding that enables identity and [RFC4627] based security token encoding that enables identity and
security information to be shared across security domains. A security information to be shared across security domains. A
security token is generally issued by an identity provider and security token is generally issued by an identity provider and
consumed by a relying party that relies on its content to identify consumed by a relying party that relies on its content to identify
the token's subject for security related purposes. the token's subject for security related purposes.
skipping to change at page 4, line 48 skipping to change at page 5, line 15
The value of the "grant_type" parameter MUST be The value of the "grant_type" parameter MUST be
"urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:jwt-bearer". "urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:jwt-bearer".
The value of the "assertion" parameter MUST contain a single JWT. The value of the "assertion" parameter MUST contain a single JWT.
The "scope" parameter may be used, as defined in the Assertion The "scope" parameter may be used, as defined in the Assertion
Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization
Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] specification, to indicate the Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] specification, to indicate the
requested scope. requested scope.
Authentication of the client is optional, as described in Authentication of the client is optional, as described in Section
Section 3.2.1 of OAuth 2.0 [RFC6749] and consequently, the 3.2.1 of OAuth 2.0 [RFC6749] and consequently, the "client_id" is
"client_id" is only needed when a form of client authentication that only needed when a form of client authentication that relies on the
relies on the parameter is used. parameter is used.
The following non-normative example demonstrates an Access Token The following non-normative example demonstrates an Access Token
Request with a JWT as an authorization grant (with extra line breaks Request with a JWT as an authorization grant (with extra line breaks
for display purposes only): for display purposes only):
POST /token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1 POST /token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1
Host: as.example.com Host: as.example.com
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
grant_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Agrant-type%3Ajwt-bearer grant_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Agrant-type%3Ajwt-bearer
skipping to change at page 6, line 14 skipping to change at page 6, line 26
3. JWT Format and Processing Requirements 3. JWT Format and Processing Requirements
In order to issue an access token response as described in OAuth 2.0 In order to issue an access token response as described in OAuth 2.0
[RFC6749] or to rely on a JWT for client authentication, the [RFC6749] or to rely on a JWT for client authentication, the
authorization server MUST validate the JWT according to the criteria authorization server MUST validate the JWT according to the criteria
below. Application of additional restrictions and policy are at the below. Application of additional restrictions and policy are at the
discretion of the authorization server. discretion of the authorization server.
1. The JWT MUST contain an "iss" (issuer) claim that contains a 1. The JWT MUST contain an "iss" (issuer) claim that contains a
unique identifier for the entity that issued the JWT. unique identifier for the entity that issued the JWT. Issuer
values SHOULD be compared using the Simple String Comparison
method defined in Section 6.2.1 of RFC 3986 [RFC3986], unless
otherwise specified by the application.
2. The JWT MUST contain a "sub" (subject) claim identifying the 2. The JWT MUST contain a "sub" (subject) claim identifying the
subject of the transaction. The subject MAY identify the subject of the transaction. The subject MAY identify the
resource owner for whom the access token is being requested. resource owner for whom the access token is being requested.
a. When using a JWT as an authorization grant, the subject A. When using a JWT as an authorization grant, the subject
SHOULD identify an authorized accessor for whom the access SHOULD identify an authorized accessor for whom the access
token is being requested (typically the resource owner, or token is being requested (typically the resource owner, or
an authorized delegate). an authorized delegate).
b. For client authentication, the subject MUST be the B. For client authentication, the subject MUST be the
"client_id" of the OAuth client. "client_id" of the OAuth client.
3. The JWT MUST contain an "aud" (audience) claim containing a 3. The JWT MUST contain an "aud" (audience) claim containing a
value that identifies the authorization server as an intended value that identifies the authorization server as an intended
audience. The token endpoint URL of the authorization server audience. The token endpoint URL of the authorization server
MAY be used as a value for an "aud" element to identify the MAY be used as a value for an "aud" element to identify the
authorization server as an intended audience of the JWT. JWTs authorization server as an intended audience of the JWT. JWTs
that do not identify the authorization server as an intended that do not identify the authorization server as an intended
audience MUST be rejected. audience MUST be rejected. Audience values SHOULD be compared
using the Simple String Comparison method defined in Section
6.2.1 of RFC 3986 [RFC3986], unless otherwise specified by the
application.
4. The JWT MUST contain an "exp" (expiration) claim that limits the 4. The JWT MUST contain an "exp" (expiration) claim that limits the
time window during which the JWT can be used. The authorization time window during which the JWT can be used. The authorization
server MUST verify that the expiration time has not passed, server MUST verify that the expiration time has not passed,
subject to allowable clock skew between systems, and reject subject to allowable clock skew between systems, and reject
expired JWTs. The authorization server MAY reject JWTs with an expired JWTs. The authorization server MAY reject JWTs with an
"exp" claim value that is unreasonably far in the future. "exp" claim value that is unreasonably far in the future.
5. The JWT MAY contain an "nbf" (not before) claim that identifies 5. The JWT MAY contain an "nbf" (not before) claim that identifies
the time before which the token MUST NOT be accepted for the time before which the token MUST NOT be accepted for
skipping to change at page 8, line 23 skipping to change at page 8, line 39
Though non-normative, the following examples illustrate what a Though non-normative, the following examples illustrate what a
conforming JWT and access token request would look like. conforming JWT and access token request would look like.
The example shows a JWT issued and signed by the system entity The example shows a JWT issued and signed by the system entity
identified as "https://jwt-idp.example.com". The subject of the JWT identified as "https://jwt-idp.example.com". The subject of the JWT
is identified by email address as "mike@example.com". The intended is identified by email address as "mike@example.com". The intended
audience of the JWT is "https://jwt-rp.example.net", which is an audience of the JWT is "https://jwt-rp.example.net", which is an
identifier with which the authorization server identifies itself. identifier with which the authorization server identifies itself.
The JWT is sent as part of an access token request to the The JWT is sent as part of an access token request to the
authorization server's token endpoint at "https://authz.example.net/ authorization server's token endpoint at
token.oauth2". "https://authz.example.net/token.oauth2".
Below is an example JSON object that could be encoded to produce the Below is an example JSON object that could be encoded to produce the
JWT Claims Object for a JWT: JWT Claims Object for a JWT:
{"iss":"https://jwt-idp.example.com", {"iss":"https://jwt-idp.example.com",
"sub":"mailto:mike@example.com", "sub":"mailto:mike@example.com",
"aud":"https://jwt-rp.example.net", "aud":"https://jwt-rp.example.net",
"nbf":1300815780, "nbf":1300815780,
"exp":1300819380, "exp":1300819380,
"http://claims.example.com/member":true} "http://claims.example.com/member":true}
The following example JSON object, used as the header of a JWT, The following example JSON object, used as the header of a JWT,
declares that the JWT is signed with the ECDSA P-256 SHA-256 declares that the JWT is signed with the ECDSA P-256 SHA-256
algorithm. algorithm.
{"alg":"ES256"} {"alg":"ES256"}
To present the JWT with the claims and header shown in the previous To present the JWT with the claims and header shown in the previous
example as part of an access token request, for example, the client example as part of an access token request, for example, the client
might make the following HTTPS request (with extra line breaks for might make the following HTTPS request (with extra line breaks for
display purposes only): display purposes only):
POST /token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1 POST /token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1
Host: authz.example.net Host: authz.example.net
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
skipping to change at page 9, line 40 skipping to change at page 10, line 7
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
No additional security considerations apply beyond those described No additional security considerations apply beyond those described
within The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework [RFC6749], the Assertion within The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework [RFC6749], the Assertion
Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization
Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions], and the JSON Web Token (JWT) Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions], and the JSON Web Token (JWT)
[JWT] specifications. [JWT] specifications.
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
7.1. Sub-Namespace Registration of urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type 7.1. Sub-Namespace Registration of
:jwt-bearer urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:jwt-bearer
This specification registers the value "grant-type:jwt-bearer" in the This specification registers the value "grant-type:jwt-bearer" in the
IANA urn:ietf:params:oauth registry established in An IETF URN Sub- IANA urn:ietf:params:oauth registry established in An IETF URN Sub-
Namespace for OAuth [RFC6755]. Namespace for OAuth [RFC6755].
o URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:jwt-bearer o URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:jwt-bearer
o Common Name: JWT Bearer Token Grant Type Profile for OAuth 2.0 o Common Name: JWT Bearer Token Grant Type Profile for OAuth 2.0
o Change controller: IETF o Change controller: IETF
skipping to change at page 10, line 4 skipping to change at page 10, line 19
This specification registers the value "grant-type:jwt-bearer" in the This specification registers the value "grant-type:jwt-bearer" in the
IANA urn:ietf:params:oauth registry established in An IETF URN Sub- IANA urn:ietf:params:oauth registry established in An IETF URN Sub-
Namespace for OAuth [RFC6755]. Namespace for OAuth [RFC6755].
o URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:jwt-bearer o URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:jwt-bearer
o Common Name: JWT Bearer Token Grant Type Profile for OAuth 2.0 o Common Name: JWT Bearer Token Grant Type Profile for OAuth 2.0
o Change controller: IETF o Change controller: IETF
o Specification Document: [[this document]] o Specification Document: [[this document]]
7.2. Sub-Namespace Registration of urn:ietf:params:oauth:client- 7.2. Sub-Namespace Registration of
assertion-type:jwt-bearer urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:jwt-bearer
This specification registers the value "client-assertion-type:jwt- This specification registers the value
bearer" in the IANA urn:ietf:params:oauth registry established in An "client-assertion-type:jwt-bearer" in the IANA urn:ietf:params:oauth
IETF URN Sub-Namespace for OAuth [RFC6755]. registry established in An IETF URN Sub-Namespace for OAuth
[RFC6755].
o URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:jwt-bearer o URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:jwt-bearer
o Common Name: JWT Bearer Token Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client o Common Name: JWT Bearer Token Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client
Authentication Authentication
o Change controller: IETF o Change controller: IETF
o Specification Document: [[this document]] o Specification Document: [[this document]]
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions]
Campbell, B., Mortimore, C., Jones, M., and Y. Goland, Campbell, B., Mortimore, C., Jones, M., and Y. Goland,
"Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0", draft-ietf-oauth- "Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication
assertions-10 (work in progress), January 2013. and Authorization Grants", draft-ietf-oauth-assertions
(work in progress), July 2013.
[JWT] Jones, M.B., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Token [JWT] Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Token
(JWT)", draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token (work in (JWT)", draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token (work in
progress), December 2012. progress), July 2013.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
RFC 3986, January 2005.
[RFC4627] Crockford, D., "The application/json Media Type for [RFC4627] Crockford, D., "The application/json Media Type for
JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)", RFC 4627, July 2006. JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)", RFC 4627, July 2006.
[RFC6749] Hardt, D., "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework", RFC [RFC6749] Hardt, D., "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework",
6749, October 2012. RFC 6749, October 2012.
[RFC6755] Campbell, B. and H. Tschofenig, "An IETF URN Sub-Namespace [RFC6755] Campbell, B. and H. Tschofenig, "An IETF URN Sub-Namespace
for OAuth", RFC 6755, October 2012. for OAuth", RFC 6755, October 2012.
8.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-oauth-dyn-reg] [I-D.ietf-oauth-dyn-reg]
Richer, J., Bradley, J., Jones, M., and M. Machulak, Richer, J., Bradley, J., Jones, M., and M. Machulak,
"OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Protocol", draft- "OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Protocol",
ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-08 (work in progress), March 2013. draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-13 (work in progress), July 2013.
[I-D.ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer] [I-D.ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer]
Campbell, B. and C. Mortimore, "SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Campbell, B., Mortimore, C., and M. Jones, "SAML 2.0
Profiles for OAuth 2.0", draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-15 Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and
(work in progress), November 2012. Authorization Grants", draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer (work
in progress), July 2013.
[OpenID.Discovery] [OpenID.Discovery]
Sakimura, N., Bradley, J., Jones, M.B., and E. Jay, Sakimura, N., Bradley, J., Jones, M., and E. Jay, "OpenID
"OpenID Connect Discovery 1.0", March 2013. Connect Discovery 1.0", July 2013.
[OpenID.Registration] [OpenID.Registration]
Sakimura, N., Bradley, J., and M.B. Jones, "OpenID Connect Sakimura, N., Bradley, J., and M. Jones, "OpenID Connect
Dynamic Client Registration 1.0", March 2013. Dynamic Client Registration 1.0", July 2013.
Appendix A. Acknowledgements Appendix A. Acknowledgements
This profile was derived from SAML 2.0 Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client This profile was derived from SAML 2.0 Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client
Authentication and Authorization Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer] Authentication and Authorization Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer]
by Brian Campbell and Chuck Mortimore. by Brian Campbell and Chuck Mortimore.
Appendix B. Document History Appendix B. Document History
[[ to be removed by the RFC editor before publication as an RFC ]] [[ to be removed by the RFC editor before publication as an RFC ]]
-06
o Stated that issuer and audience values SHOULD be compared using
the Simple String Comparison method defined in Section 6.2.1 of
RFC 3986 unless otherwise specified by the application.
-05 -05
o Changed title from "JSON Web Token (JWT) Bearer Token Profiles for o Changed title from "JSON Web Token (JWT) Bearer Token Profiles for
OAuth 2.0" to "JSON Web Token (JWT) Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client OAuth 2.0" to "JSON Web Token (JWT) Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client
Authentication and Authorization Grants" to be more explicit about Authentication and Authorization Grants" to be more explicit about
the scope of the document per http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web the scope of the document per
/oauth/current/msg11063.html. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg11063.html.
o Numbered the list of processing rules. o Numbered the list of processing rules.
o Smallish editorial cleanups to try and improve readability and o Smallish editorial cleanups to try and improve readability and
comprehensibility. comprehensibility.
o Cleaner split out of the processing rules in cases where they o Cleaner split out of the processing rules in cases where they
differ for client authentication and authorization grants. differ for client authentication and authorization grants.
o Clarified the parameters that are used/available for authorization o Clarified the parameters that are used/available for authorization
skipping to change at page 12, line 45 skipping to change at page 13, line 21
o Tracked specification name changes: "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization o Tracked specification name changes: "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization
Protocol" to "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework" and "OAuth Protocol" to "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework" and "OAuth
2.0 Assertion Profile" to "Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0". 2.0 Assertion Profile" to "Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0".
o Merged in changes between draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-11 and o Merged in changes between draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-11 and
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-13. All changes were strictly draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-13. All changes were strictly
editorial. editorial.
-00 -00
o Created the initial IETF draft based upon draft-jones-oauth-jwt- o Created the initial IETF draft based upon
bearer-04 with no normative changes. draft-jones-oauth-jwt-bearer-04 with no normative changes.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Michael B. Jones Michael B. Jones
Microsoft Microsoft
Email: mbj@microsoft.com Email: mbj@microsoft.com
URI: http://self-issued.info/ URI: http://self-issued.info/
Brian Campbell Brian Campbell
Ping Identity Corp. Ping Identity
Email: brian.d.campbell@gmail.com Email: brian.d.campbell@gmail.com
Chuck Mortimore Chuck Mortimore
Salesforce Salesforce
Email: cmortimore@salesforce.com Email: cmortimore@salesforce.com
 End of changes. 32 change blocks. 
73 lines changed or deleted 92 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/