draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-07.txt   draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-08.txt 
OAuth Working Group M. 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: June 12, 2014 Ping Identity Expires: September 20, 2014 Ping Identity
C. Mortimore C. Mortimore
Salesforce Salesforce
December 9, 2013 March 19, 2014
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-07 draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-08
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 June 12, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 20, 2014.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 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 . . . . . . . . . . . 5 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix B. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Appendix B. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
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 [RFC7159] 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.
The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework [RFC6749] provides a method for The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework [RFC6749] provides a method for
making authenticated HTTP requests to a resource using an access making authenticated HTTP requests to a resource using an access
token. Access tokens are issued to third-party clients by an token. Access tokens are issued to third-party clients by an
authorization server (AS) with the (sometimes implicit) approval of authorization server (AS) with the (sometimes implicit) approval of
the resource owner. In OAuth, an authorization grant is an abstract the resource owner. In OAuth, an authorization grant is an abstract
skipping to change at page 3, line 12 skipping to change at page 3, line 32
are defined to support a wide range of client types and user are defined to support a wide range of client types and user
experiences. OAuth also allows for the definition of new extension experiences. OAuth also allows for the definition of new extension
grant types to support additional clients or to provide a bridge grant types to support additional clients or to provide a bridge
between OAuth and other trust frameworks. Finally, OAuth allows the between OAuth and other trust frameworks. Finally, OAuth allows the
definition of additional authentication mechanisms to be used by definition of additional authentication mechanisms to be used by
clients when interacting with the authorization server. clients when interacting with the authorization server.
The Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and The Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and
Authorization Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] specification is an Authorization Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] specification is an
abstract extension to OAuth 2.0 that provides a general framework for abstract extension to OAuth 2.0 that provides a general framework for
the use of Assertions (a.k.a. Security Tokens) as client credentials the use of Assertions (a.k.a. Security Tokens) as client credentials
and/or authorization grants with OAuth 2.0. This specification and/or authorization grants with OAuth 2.0. This specification
profiles the Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication profiles the Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication
and Authorization Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] specification to and Authorization Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] specification to
define an extension grant type that uses a JSON Web Token (JWT) define an extension grant type that uses a JSON Web Token (JWT)
Bearer Token to request an OAuth 2.0 access token as well as for use Bearer Token to request an OAuth 2.0 access token as well as for use
as client credentials. The format and processing rules for the JWT as client credentials. The format and processing rules for the JWT
defined in this specification are intentionally similar, though not defined in this specification are intentionally similar, though not
identical, to those in the closely related SAML 2.0 Profile for OAuth identical, to those in the closely related SAML 2.0 Profile for OAuth
2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization Grants 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization Grants
[I-D.ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer] specification. [I-D.ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer] specification.
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 8, line 18 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 19 skipping to change at page 9, line 39
of this profile. Specific items that require agreement are as of this profile. Specific items that require agreement are as
follows: values for the issuer and audience identifiers, the location follows: values for the issuer and audience identifiers, the location
of the token endpoint, the key used to apply and verify the digital of the token endpoint, the key used to apply and verify the digital
signature or keyed message digest over the JWT, one-time use signature or keyed message digest over the JWT, one-time use
restrictions on JWT, maximum JWT lifetime allowed, and the specific restrictions on JWT, maximum JWT lifetime allowed, and the specific
subject and claim requirements of the JWT. The exchange of such subject and claim requirements of the JWT. The exchange of such
information is explicitly out of scope for this specification. In information is explicitly out of scope for this specification. In
some cases, additional profiles may be created that constrain or some cases, additional profiles may be created that constrain or
prescribe these values or specify how they are to be exchanged. prescribe these values or specify how they are to be exchanged.
Examples of such profiles include the OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Examples of such profiles include the OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client
Registration Protocol [I-D.ietf-oauth-dyn-reg], OpenID Connect Registration Core Protocol [I-D.ietf-oauth-dyn-reg], OpenID Connect
Dynamic Client Registration 1.0 [OpenID.Registration], and OpenID Dynamic Client Registration 1.0 [OpenID.Registration], and OpenID
Connect Discovery 1.0 [OpenID.Discovery]. Connect Discovery 1.0 [OpenID.Discovery].
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
The security considerations described within the Assertion Framework The security considerations described within the Assertion Framework
for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization Grants for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization Grants
[I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions], The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions], The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework
[RFC6749], and the JSON Web Token (JWT) [JWT] specifications are all [RFC6749], and the JSON Web Token (JWT) [JWT] specifications are all
applicable to this document. applicable to this document.
The specification does not mandate replay protection for the JWT The specification does not mandate replay protection for the JWT
usage for either the authorization grant or for client usage for either the authorization grant or for client
authentication. It is an optional feature, which implementations may authentication. It is an optional feature, which implementations may
employ at their own discretion. employ at their own discretion.
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
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 Client Authentication "Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication
and Authorization Grants", draft-ietf-oauth-assertions and Authorization Grants", draft-ietf-oauth-assertions
(work in progress), December 2013. (work in progress), March 2014.
[JWT] Jones, M., 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), November 2013. progress), March 2014.
[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 [RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
3986, January 2005. RFC 3986, January 2005.
[RFC4627] Crockford, D., "The application/json Media Type for
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.
[RFC7159] Bray, T., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
Interchange Format", RFC 7159, March 2014.
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., Jones, M., Bradley, J., Machulak, M., and P.
"OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Protocol", draft- Hunt, "OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Core
ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-13 (work in progress), July 2013. Protocol", draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-16 (work in progress),
February 2014.
[I-D.ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer] [I-D.ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer]
Campbell, B., Mortimore, C., and M. Jones, "SAML 2.0 Campbell, B., Mortimore, C., and M. Jones, "SAML 2.0
Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and
Authorization Grants", draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer (work Authorization Grants", draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer (work
in progress), December 2013. in progress), March 2014.
[OpenID.Discovery] [OpenID.Discovery]
Sakimura, N., Bradley, J., Jones, M., and E. Jay, "OpenID Sakimura, N., Bradley, J., Jones, M., and E. Jay, "OpenID
Connect Discovery 1.0", October 2013. Connect Discovery 1.0", February 2014.
[OpenID.Registration] [OpenID.Registration]
Sakimura, N., Bradley, J., and M. Jones, "OpenID Connect Sakimura, N., Bradley, J., and M. Jones, "OpenID Connect
Dynamic Client Registration 1.0", October 2013. Dynamic Client Registration 1.0", February 2014.
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 ]]
draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-08
o Updated references, including replacing references to RFC 4627
with RFC 7159.
draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-07 draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-07
o Clean up language around subject per http://www.ietf.org/mail- o Clean up language around subject per
archive/web/oauth/current/msg12250.html. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg12250.html.
o As suggested in http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current o As suggested in
/msg12251.html stated that "In the absence of an application http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg12251.html
profile specifying otherwise, compliant applications MUST compare stated that "In the absence of an application profile specifying
the audience values using the Simple String Comparison method otherwise, compliant applications MUST compare the audience values
defined in Section 6.2.1 of RFC 3986." using the Simple String Comparison method defined in Section 6.2.1
of RFC 3986."
o Added one-time use, maximum lifetime, and specific subject and o Added one-time use, maximum lifetime, and specific subject and
attribute requirements to Interoperability Considerations based on attribute requirements to Interoperability Considerations based on
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg12252.html. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg12252.html.
o Remove "or its subject confirmation requirements cannot be met" o Remove "or its subject confirmation requirements cannot be met"
text. text.
o Reword security considerations and mention that replay protection o Reword security considerations and mention that replay protection
is not mandated based on http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ is not mandated based on
oauth/current/msg12259.html. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg12259.html.
-06 -06
o Stated that issuer and audience values SHOULD be compared using o Stated that issuer and audience values SHOULD be compared using
the Simple String Comparison method defined in Section 6.2.1 of the Simple String Comparison method defined in Section 6.2.1 of
RFC 3986 unless otherwise specified by the application. 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 13, line 26 skipping to change at page 14, line 14
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
 End of changes. 33 change blocks. 
81 lines changed or deleted 88 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/