draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-09.txt		draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-10.txt
	B. Campbell, Ed.		B. Campbell, Ed.
	Internet-Draft Ping Identity Corp.		Internet-Draft Ping Identity Corp.
	Intended status: Standards Track C. Mortimore		Intended status: Standards Track C. Mortimore
	Expires: April 3, 2012 Salesforce.com		Expires: July 4, 2012 Salesforce.com
	Oct 2011		Jan 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-09		draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-10
	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
	means for requesting an OAuth 2.0 access token as well as for use as		means for requesting an OAuth 2.0 access token as well as for use as
	a means of client authentication.		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 April 3, 2012.		This Internet-Draft will expire on July 4, 2012.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2011 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
	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
	skipping to change at page 6, line 27		skipping to change at page 6, line 27
	of the authorization server. The authorization server MUST verify		of the authorization server. The authorization server MUST verify
	that the value of the Recipient attribute matches the token		that the value of the Recipient attribute matches the token
	endpoint URL (or an acceptable alias) to which the Assertion was		endpoint URL (or an acceptable alias) to which the Assertion was
	delivered. The <SubjectConfirmationData> element MUST have a		delivered. The <SubjectConfirmationData> element MUST have a
	NotOnOrAfter attribute that limits the window during which the		NotOnOrAfter attribute that limits the window during which the
	Assertion can be confirmed. The <SubjectConfirmationData> element		Assertion can be confirmed. The <SubjectConfirmationData> element
	MAY also contain an Address attribute limiting the client address		MAY also contain an Address attribute limiting the client address
	from which the Assertion can be delivered. Verification of the		from which the Assertion can be delivered. Verification of the
	Address is at the discretion of the authorization server.		Address is at the discretion of the authorization server.
	o The authorization server MUST verify that occurances of the		o The authorization server MUST verify that occurrences of the
	NotOnOrAfter instant has not passed, subject to allowable clock		NotOnOrAfter instant has not passed, subject to allowable clock
	skew between systems. An invalid NotOnOrAfter instant on the		skew between systems. An invalid NotOnOrAfter instant on the
	<Conditions> element invalidates the entire assertion. An invalid		<Conditions> element invalidates the entire assertion. An invalid
	NotOnOrAfter instant on a <SubjectConfirmationData> element only		NotOnOrAfter instant on a <SubjectConfirmationData> element only
	invalidates the individual <SubjectConfirmation>. The		invalidates the individual <SubjectConfirmation>. The
	authorization server MAY reject assertions with a NotOnOrAfter		authorization server MAY reject assertions with a NotOnOrAfter
	instant that is unreasonably far in the future. The authorization		instant that is unreasonably far in the future. The authorization
	server MAY ensure that Bearer Assertions are not replayed, by		server MAY ensure that Bearer Assertions are not replayed, by
	maintaining the set of used ID values for the length of time for		maintaining the set of used ID values for the length of time for
	which the Assertion would be considered valid based on the		which the Assertion would be considered valid based on the
	skipping to change at page 11, line 25		skipping to change at page 11, line 25
	The following people contributed wording and concepts to this		The following people contributed wording and concepts to this
	document: Paul Madsen, Patrick Harding, Peter Motykowski, Eran		document: Paul Madsen, Patrick Harding, Peter Motykowski, Eran
	Hammer-Lahav, Peter Saint-Andre, Ian Barnett, Eric Fazendin, Torsten		Hammer-Lahav, Peter Saint-Andre, Ian Barnett, Eric Fazendin, Torsten
	Lodderstedt, Susan Harper, Scott Tomilson, Scott Cantor, Michael		Lodderstedt, Susan Harper, Scott Tomilson, Scott Cantor, Michael
	Jones, Hannes Tschofenig, David Waite and Mukesh Bhatnagar.		Jones, Hannes Tschofenig, David Waite and Mukesh 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-10
			o fix a spelling mistake
	draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-09		draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-09
	o Attempt to address an ambiguity around validation requirements		o Attempt to address an ambiguity around validation requirements
	when the Conditions element contain a NotOnOrAfter and		when the Conditions element contain a NotOnOrAfter and
	SubjectConfirmation/SubjectConfirmationData does too. Basically		SubjectConfirmation/SubjectConfirmationData does too. Basically
	it needs to have at least one bearer SubjectConfirmation element		it needs to have at least one bearer SubjectConfirmation element
	but that element can omit SubjectConfirmationData, if Conditions		but that element can omit SubjectConfirmationData, if Conditions
	has an expiry on it. Otherwise, a valid SubjectConfirmation must		has an expiry on it. Otherwise, a valid SubjectConfirmation must
	have a SubjectConfirmationData with Recipient and NotOnOrAfter.		have a SubjectConfirmationData with Recipient and NotOnOrAfter.
	And any SubjectConfirmationData that has those elements needs to		And any SubjectConfirmationData that has those elements needs to
	have them checked.		have them checked.
	o clarified that AudienceRestriction is under Conditions (even		o clarified that AudienceRestriction is under Conditions (even
	though it's implied by schema)		though it's implied by schema)
	o fix a typo		o fix a typo
	draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-08		draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-08
	o fix some typos		o fix some typos
	draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-07
	o update reference from draft-campbell-oauth-urn-sub-ns to		o update reference from draft-campbell-oauth-urn-sub-ns to
	draft-ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns		draft-ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns
	o Updated to reference draft-ietf-oauth-v2-20		o Updated to reference draft-ietf-oauth-v2-20
	draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-06		draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-06
	o Fix three typos NamseID->NameID and (2x) Namspace->Namespace		o Fix three typos NamseID->NameID and (2x) Namspace->Namespace
	draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-05		draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-05
	skipping to change at page 16, line 6		skipping to change at page 16, line 10
	Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS		Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS
	Standard OASIS.saml-profiles-2.0-os, March 2005.		Standard OASIS.saml-profiles-2.0-os, March 2005.
	[OASIS.saml-sec-consider-2.0-os]		[OASIS.saml-sec-consider-2.0-os]
	Hirsch, F., Philpott, R., and E. Maler, "Security and		Hirsch, F., Philpott, R., and E. Maler, "Security and
	Privacy Considerations for the OASIS Security Markup		Privacy Considerations for the OASIS Security Markup
	Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS Standard saml-sec-consider-		Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS Standard saml-sec-consider-
	2.0-os, March 2005.		2.0-os, March 2005.
	[W3C.REC-html401-19991224]		[W3C.REC-html401-19991224]
	Raggett, D., Jacobs, I., and A. Hors, "HTML 4.01		Raggett, D., Hors, A., and I. Jacobs, "HTML 4.01
	Specification", World Wide Web Consortium		Specification", World Wide Web Consortium
	Recommendation REC-html401-19991224, December 1999,		Recommendation REC-html401-19991224, December 1999,
	<http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224>.		<http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224>.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Brian Campbell (editor)		Brian Campbell (editor)
	Ping Identity Corp.		Ping Identity Corp.
	Email: brian.d.campbell@gmail.com		Email: brian.d.campbell@gmail.com
End of changes. 8 change blocks.
	10 lines changed or deleted		11 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/