client_name isn't actually required #250561
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7591#section-3.2 > Additionally, the authorization server MUST return all registered metadata about this client, including any fields provisioned by the authorization server itself. I interpret this as... since we always include the `client_name` it should always be in the response... but this isn't true in practice.... which is fine. We aren't using this property anywhere anyway. Fixes #250537
rzhao271
approved these changes
Jun 3, 2025
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7591#section-3.2
I interpret this as... since we always include the
client_nameit should always be in the response... but this isn't true in practice.... which is fine. We aren't using this property anywhere anyway.Fixes #250537