draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-13.txt   draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-14.txt 
OAuth Working Group B. Campbell OAuth Working Group B. Campbell
Internet-Draft Ping Identity Internet-Draft Ping Identity
Intended status: Standards Track C. Mortimore Intended status: Standards Track C. Mortimore
Expires: January 4, 2013 Salesforce Expires: March 18, 2013 Salesforce
July 3, 2012 September 14, 2012
SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Profiles for OAuth 2.0 SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Profiles for OAuth 2.0
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-13 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-14
Abstract Abstract
This specification defines the use of a SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion as This specification defines the use of a SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion as
a means for requesting an OAuth 2.0 access token as well as for use a means for requesting an OAuth 2.0 access token as well as for use
as a means of client authentication. 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
skipping to change at page 1, line 33 skipping to change at page 1, line 33
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 January 4, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on March 18, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2012 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 13 skipping to change at page 2, line 13
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 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 SAML Assertions as Authorization Grants . . . . . . 4 2.1. Using SAML Assertions as Authorization Grants . . . . . . 4
2.2. Using SAML Assertions for Client Authentication . . . . . 5 2.2. Using SAML Assertions for Client Authentication . . . . . 5
3. Assertion Format and Processing Requirements . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Assertion Format and Processing Requirements . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. Authorization Grant Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.1. Authorization Grant Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2. Client Authentication Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2. Client Authentication Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Authorization Grant Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4. Authorization Grant Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1. Sub-Namespace Registration of 6.1. Sub-Namespace Registration of
urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:saml2-bearer . . . . . . 10 urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:saml2-bearer . . . . . . 10
6.2. Sub-Namespace Registration of 6.2. Sub-Namespace Registration of
urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer . 11 urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer . 11
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
skipping to change at page 4, line 6 skipping to change at page 4, line 6
[OASIS.saml-profiles-2.0-os]. This specification is reusing, to the [OASIS.saml-profiles-2.0-os]. This specification is reusing, to the
extent reasonable, concepts and patterns from that well-established extent reasonable, concepts and patterns from that well-established
Profile. Profile.
This document defines how a SAML Assertion can be used to request an This document defines how a SAML Assertion can be used to request an
access token when a client wishes to utilize an existing trust access token when a client wishes to utilize an existing trust
relationship, expressed through the semantics of (and digital relationship, expressed through the semantics of (and digital
signature calculated over) the SAML Assertion, without a direct user signature calculated over) the SAML Assertion, without a direct user
approval step at the authorization server. It also defines how a approval step at the authorization server. It also defines how a
SAML Assertion can be used as a client authentication mechanism. The SAML Assertion can be used as a client authentication mechanism. The
use of an Assertion for client authentication is orthogonal and use of an Assertion for client authentication is orthogonal to and
separable from using an Assertion as an authorization grant and the separable from using an Assertion as an authorization grant. They
two can be used either in combination or in isolation. can be used either in combination or separately. Client assertion
authentication is nothing more than an alternative way for a client
to authenticate to the token endpoint and must be used in conjunction
with some grant type to form a complete and meaningful protocol
request. Assertion authorization grants may be used with or without
client authentication or identification. Whether or not client
authentication is needed in conjunction with an assertion
authorization grant, as well as the supported types of client
authentication, are policy decisions at the discretion of the
authorization server.
The process by which the client obtains the SAML Assertion, prior to The process by which the client obtains the SAML Assertion, prior to
exchanging it with the authorization server or using it for client exchanging it with the authorization server or using it for client
authentication, is out of scope. authentication, is out of scope.
1.1. Notational Conventions 1.1. Notational Conventions
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
skipping to change at page 5, line 7 skipping to change at page 5, line 17
The value of the "assertion" parameter MUST contain a single SAML 2.0 The value of the "assertion" parameter MUST contain a single SAML 2.0
Assertion. The SAML Assertion XML data MUST be encoded using Assertion. The SAML Assertion XML data MUST be encoded using
base64url, where the encoding adheres to the definition in Section 5 base64url, where the encoding adheres to the definition in Section 5
of RFC4648 [RFC4648] and where the padding bits are set to zero. To of RFC4648 [RFC4648] and where the padding bits are set to zero. To
avoid the need for subsequent encoding steps (by "application/ avoid the need for subsequent encoding steps (by "application/
x-www-form-urlencoded" [W3C.REC-html401-19991224], for example), the x-www-form-urlencoded" [W3C.REC-html401-19991224], for example), the
base64url encoded data SHOULD NOT be line wrapped and pad characters base64url encoded data SHOULD NOT be line wrapped and pad characters
("=") SHOULD NOT be included. ("=") SHOULD NOT be included.
The following non-normative example demonstrates an Access Token
Request with an assertion as an authorization grant (with extra line
breaks for display purposes only):
POST /token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1
Host: as.example.com
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
grant_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Agrant-type%3Asaml2-bearer&
assertion=PHNhbWxwOl...[omitted for brevity]...ZT4
2.2. Using SAML Assertions for Client Authentication 2.2. Using SAML Assertions for Client Authentication
To use a SAML Bearer Assertion for client authentication grant, use To use a SAML Bearer Assertion for client authentication grant, use
the following parameter values and encodings. the following parameter values and encodings.
The value of the "client_assertion_type" parameter MUST be The value of the "client_assertion_type" parameter MUST be
"urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer". "urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer".
The value of the "client_assertion" parameter MUST contain a single The value of the "client_assertion" parameter MUST contain a single
SAML 2.0 Assertion. The SAML Assertion XML data MUST be encoded SAML 2.0 Assertion. The SAML Assertion XML data MUST be encoded
using base64url, where the encoding adheres to the definition in using base64url, where the encoding adheres to the definition in
Section 5 of RFC4648 [RFC4648] and where the padding bits are set to Section 5 of RFC4648 [RFC4648] and where the padding bits are set to
zero. To avoid the need for subsequent encoding steps (by zero. To avoid the need for subsequent encoding steps (by
"application/x-www-form-urlencoded" [W3C.REC-html401-19991224], for "application/x-www-form-urlencoded" [W3C.REC-html401-19991224], for
example), the base64url encoded data SHOULD NOT be line wrapped and example), the base64url encoded data SHOULD NOT be line wrapped and
pad characters ("=") SHOULD NOT be included. pad characters ("=") SHOULD NOT be included.
The following non-normative example demonstrates a client
authenticating using an assertion during the presentation of an
authorization code grant in an Access Token Request (with extra line
breaks for display purposes only):
POST /token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1
Host: as.example.com
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
grant_type=authorization_code&
code=vAZEIHjQTHuGgaSvyW9hO0RpusLzkvTOww3trZBxZpo&
client_assertion_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth
%3Aclient-assertion-type%3Asaml2-bearer&
client_assertion=PHNhbW...[omitted for brevity]...ZT
3. Assertion Format and Processing Requirements 3. Assertion Format and Processing Requirements
In order to issue an access token response as described in The OAuth In order to issue an access token response as described in The OAuth
2.0 Authorization Protocol [I-D.ietf-oauth-v2] or to rely on an 2.0 Authorization Protocol [I-D.ietf-oauth-v2] or to rely on an
Assertion for client authentication, the authorization server MUST Assertion for client authentication, the authorization server MUST
validate the Assertion according to the criteria below. Application validate the Assertion according to the criteria below. Application
of additional restrictions and policy are at the discretion of the of additional restrictions and policy are at the discretion of the
authorization server. authorization server.
o The Assertion's <Issuer> element MUST contain a unique identifier o The Assertion's <Issuer> element MUST contain a unique identifier
skipping to change at page 7, line 41 skipping to change at page 8, line 32
If the Assertion is not valid, or its subject confirmation If the Assertion is not valid, or its subject confirmation
requirements cannot be met, the authorization server MUST construct requirements cannot be met, the authorization server MUST construct
an error response as defined in OAuth 2.0 [I-D.ietf-oauth-v2]. The an error response as defined in OAuth 2.0 [I-D.ietf-oauth-v2]. The
value of the "error" parameter MUST be the "invalid_grant" error value of the "error" parameter MUST be the "invalid_grant" error
code. The authorization server MAY include additional information code. The authorization server MAY include additional information
regarding the reasons the Assertion was considered invalid using the regarding the reasons the Assertion was considered invalid using the
"error_description" or "error_uri" parameters. "error_description" or "error_uri" parameters.
For example: For example:
HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request
Content-Type: application/json Content-Type: application/json
Cache-Control: no-store Cache-Control: no-store
{ {
"error":"invalid_grant", "error":"invalid_grant",
"error_description":"Audience validation failed" "error_description":"Audience validation failed"
} }
3.2. Client Authentication Processing 3.2. Client Authentication Processing
If the client Assertion is not valid, or its subject confirmation If the client Assertion is not valid, or its subject confirmation
requirements cannot be met, the authorization server MUST construct requirements cannot be met, the authorization server MUST construct
an error response as defined in OAuth 2.0 [I-D.ietf-oauth-v2]. The an error response as defined in OAuth 2.0 [I-D.ietf-oauth-v2]. The
value of the "error" parameter MUST be the "invalid_client" error value of the "error" parameter MUST be the "invalid_client" error
code. The authorization server MAY include additional information code. The authorization server MAY include additional information
regarding the reasons the Assertion was considered invalid using the regarding the reasons the Assertion was considered invalid using the
"error_description" or "error_uri" parameters. "error_description" or "error_uri" parameters.
4. Authorization Grant Example 4. Authorization Grant Example
Though non-normative, the following examples illustrate what a Though non-normative, the following examples illustrate what a
conforming Assertion and access token request would look like. conforming Assertion and access token request would look like.
Below is an example SAML 2.0 Assertion (whitespace formatting is for Below is an example SAML 2.0 Assertion (whitespace formatting is for
display purposes only): display purposes only):
<Assertion IssueInstant="2010-10-01T20:07:34.619Z" <Assertion IssueInstant="2010-10-01T20:07:34.619Z"
ID="ef1xsbZxPV2oqjd7HTLRLIBlBb7" ID="ef1xsbZxPV2oqjd7HTLRLIBlBb7"
Version="2.0" Version="2.0"
xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:assertion"> xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:assertion">
<Issuer>https://saml-idp.example.com</Issuer> <Issuer>https://saml-idp.example.com</Issuer>
<ds:Signature xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#"> <ds:Signature xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#">
[...omitted for brevity...] [...omitted for brevity...]
</ds:Signature> </ds:Signature>
<Subject> <Subject>
<NameID <NameID
Format="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.1:nameid-format:emailAddress"> Format="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.1:nameid-format:emailAddress">
brian@example.com brian@example.com
</NameID> </NameID>
<SubjectConfirmation <SubjectConfirmation
Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer"> Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">
<SubjectConfirmationData <SubjectConfirmationData
NotOnOrAfter="2010-10-01T20:12:34.619Z" NotOnOrAfter="2010-10-01T20:12:34.619Z"
Recipient="https://authz.example.net/token.oauth2"/> Recipient="https://authz.example.net/token.oauth2"/>
</SubjectConfirmation> </SubjectConfirmation>
</Subject> </Subject>
<Conditions> <Conditions>
<AudienceRestriction> <AudienceRestriction>
<Audience>https://saml-sp.example.net</Audience> <Audience>https://saml-sp.example.net</Audience>
</AudienceRestriction> </AudienceRestriction>
</Conditions> </Conditions>
<AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2010-10-01T20:07:34.371Z"> <AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2010-10-01T20:07:34.371Z">
<AuthnContext> <AuthnContext>
<AuthnContextClassRef> <AuthnContextClassRef>
urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:X509 urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:X509
</AuthnContextClassRef> </AuthnContextClassRef>
</AuthnContext> </AuthnContext>
</AuthnStatement> </AuthnStatement>
</Assertion> </Assertion>
Figure 1: Example SAML 2.0 Assertion Figure 1: Example SAML 2.0 Assertion
To present the Assertion shown in the previous example as part of an To present the Assertion shown in the previous example as part of an
access token request, for example, the client might make the access token request, for example, the client might make the
following HTTPS request (with line breaks for display purposes only): following HTTPS request (with extra line breaks for 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
grant_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Agrant-type%3Asaml2- grant_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Agrant-type%3Asaml2-
bearer&assertion=PEFzc2VydGlvbiBJc3N1ZUluc3RhbnQ9IjIwMTEtMDU bearer&assertion=PEFzc2VydGlvbiBJc3N1ZUluc3RhbnQ9IjIwMTEtMDU
[...omitted for brevity...]aG5TdGF0ZW1lbnQ-PC9Bc3NlcnRpb24- [...omitted for brevity...]aG5TdGF0ZW1lbnQ-PC9Bc3NlcnRpb24-
Figure 2: Example Request Figure 2: Example Request
5. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
No additional security considerations apply beyond those described No additional security considerations apply beyond those described
within The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol [I-D.ietf-oauth-v2], the within The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol [I-D.ietf-oauth-v2], the
OAuth 2.0 Assertion Profile [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions], and in the OAuth 2.0 Assertion Profile [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions], and in the
Security and Privacy Considerations for the OASIS Security Assertion Security and Privacy Considerations for the OASIS Security Assertion
Markup Language (SAML) V2.0 [OASIS.saml-sec-consider-2.0-os]. Markup Language (SAML) V2.0 [OASIS.saml-sec-consider-2.0-os].
skipping to change at page 11, line 29 skipping to change at page 11, line 29
o Specification Document: [[this document]] o Specification Document: [[this document]]
7. References 7. References
7.1. Normative References 7.1. 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", "Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0",
draft-ietf-oauth-assertions-04 (work in progress), draft-ietf-oauth-assertions-05 (work in progress),
July 2012. September 2012.
[I-D.ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns] [I-D.ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns]
Campbell, B. and H. Tschofenig, "An IETF URN Sub-Namespace Campbell, B. and H. Tschofenig, "An IETF URN Sub-Namespace
for OAuth", draft-ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns-05 (work in for OAuth", draft-ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns-06 (work in
progress), June 2012. progress), July 2012.
[I-D.ietf-oauth-v2] [I-D.ietf-oauth-v2]
Hammer-Lahav, E., Recordon, D., and D. Hardt, "The OAuth Hardt, D., "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework",
2.0 Authorization Framework", draft-ietf-oauth-v2-28 (work draft-ietf-oauth-v2-31 (work in progress), August 2012.
in progress), June 2012.
[OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os] [OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os]
Cantor, S., Kemp, J., Philpott, R., and E. Maler, Cantor, S., Kemp, J., Philpott, R., and E. Maler,
"Assertions and Protocol for the OASIS Security Assertion "Assertions and Protocol for the OASIS Security Assertion
Markup Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS Standard saml-core- Markup Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS Standard saml-core-
2.0-os, March 2005. 2.0-os, March 2005.
[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.
skipping to change at page 12, line 43 skipping to change at page 12, line 42
document: Paul Madsen, Patrick Harding, Peter Motykowski, Eran document: Paul Madsen, Patrick Harding, Peter Motykowski, Eran
Hammer, Peter Saint-Andre, Ian Barnett, Eric Fazendin, Torsten Hammer, Peter Saint-Andre, Ian Barnett, Eric Fazendin, Torsten
Lodderstedt, Susan Harper, Scott Tomilson, Scott Cantor, Michael B. Lodderstedt, Susan Harper, Scott Tomilson, Scott Cantor, Michael B.
Jones, Hannes Tschofenig, David Waite, Phil Hunt, and Mukesh Jones, Hannes Tschofenig, David Waite, Phil Hunt, and Mukesh
Bhatnagar. Bhatnagar.
Appendix B. Document History Appendix B. Document History
[[ to be removed by RFC editor before publication as an RFC ]] [[ to be removed by RFC editor before publication as an RFC ]]
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-14
o Add more text to intro explaining that an assertion grant type can
be used with or without client authentication/identification and
that client assertion authentication is nothing more than an
alternative way for a client to authenticate to the token endpoint
o Add examples to Sections 2.1 and 2.2
o Update references
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-13 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-13
o Update references: oauth-assertions-04, oauth-urn-sub-ns-05, oauth o Update references: oauth-assertions-04, oauth-urn-sub-ns-05, oauth
-28 -28
o Changed "Description" to "Specification Document" in both o Changed "Description" to "Specification Document" in both
registration requests in IANA Considerations per changes to the registration requests in IANA Considerations per changes to the
template in ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns(-03) template in ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns(-03)
o Added "(or an acceptable alias)" so that it's in both sentences o Added "(or an acceptable alias)" so that it's in both sentences
about Recipient and the token endpoint URL so there's no ambiguity about Recipient and the token endpoint URL so there's no ambiguity
o (now Security and OAuth was Internet and nothing) o Update area and workgroup (now Security and OAuth was Internet and
nothing)
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-12 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-12
o updated reference to draft-ietf-oauth-v2 from -25 to -26 and o updated reference to draft-ietf-oauth-v2 from -25 to -26 and
draft-ietf-oauth-assertions from -02 to -03 draft-ietf-oauth-assertions from -02 to -03
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-11 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-11
o Removed text about limited lifetime access tokens and the SHOULD o Removed text about limited lifetime access tokens and the SHOULD
NOT on issuing refresh tokens. The text was moved to NOT on issuing refresh tokens. The text was moved to
skipping to change at page 16, line 5 skipping to change at page 16, line 14
o Updated to reference draft-ietf-oauth-v2-12 and denote as work in o Updated to reference draft-ietf-oauth-v2-12 and denote as work in
progress progress
o Update Parameter Registration Request to use similar terms as o Update Parameter Registration Request to use similar terms as
draft-ietf-oauth-v2-12 and remove Related information part draft-ietf-oauth-v2-12 and remove Related information part
o Add some text giving discretion to AS on rejecting assertions with o Add some text giving discretion to AS on rejecting assertions with
unreasonably long validity window. unreasonably long validity window.
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-00
o Added Parameter Registration Request for "assertion" to IANA o Added Parameter Registration Request for "assertion" to IANA
Considerations. Considerations.
o Changed document name to draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer in o Changed document name to draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer in
anticipation of becoming an OAUTH WG item. anticipation of becoming an OAUTH WG item.
o Attempt to move the entire definition of the 'assertion' parameter o Attempt to move the entire definition of the 'assertion' parameter
into this draft (it will no longer be defined in OAuth 2 Protocol into this draft (it will no longer be defined in OAuth 2 Protocol
Framework). Framework).
 End of changes. 20 change blocks. 
65 lines changed or deleted 113 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/