Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Dec 12, 2024. It is now read-only.

Conversation

@tomdaffurn
Copy link
Contributor

For #33

The response is a [SIOPv2 Authorization Request](https://openid.github.io/SIOPv2/openid-connect-self-issued-v2-wg-draft.html#name-self-issued-openid-provider-a).
The response is a [SIOPv2 Authorization Request](https://openid.github.io/SIOPv2/openid-connect-self-issued-v2-wg-draft.html#name-self-issued-openid-provider-a),
which is sent as a [JWT-Secured Authorization Request (JAR)](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9101.html#name-authorization-request).
It may be returned as EITHER "request by value" or "request by reference".
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is there a way we can pick one to make this simpler to implement?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Trying to say here that each KCC issuer should pick just one. PFI is picking by-value

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yes - I mean can we remove the optionality from the spec itself - no either - just you must do x

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ah ok. That's being discussed over in #33

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants