Dmitri Zagidulin

@michielbdejong > so one thing I'm not clear on now that I'm writing this down, is how would this be different in result, when comparing it to the current system...

Yeah, I do think that's a reasonable requirement. (Redirect uri to be similar domain as the client_id). As far as the Dynamic Registration spec, I do vaguely recall that the...

(And I do like your suggestion that having those two domains be the same means that there's less need for required Dynamic registration.)

@elf-pavlik > It doesn't seem that client has any influence on how server creates `client_id` So I think I was thinking of [Section 8.2 - Stateless Registration](https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-registration-1_0.html#StatelessRegistration), in the Dynamic...

@RubenVerborgh > isn't the `client_id` specific per app per browser? Right, so, part of the proposal is to change the mechanism. Currently, each app has no identifier that persists across...

@zenomt - you’re absolutely right, thanks for the catch. I have an alternate proposal, which should accomplish our overall goal, while still being compliant with the spec. (I’ll ask some...

I agree with the reasoning that objects should be immutable. I do think that if we add that to the spec, though, we also need to define (or at least...

Thanks for the catch! We'll be doing a refresh/facelift of Warp shortly (to update it to newer versions of the client library), and will fix this.

@THIS-Usr possibly, I'm not sure. Tell us more -- is this on databox.me or on a local server? Do you have any idea about the context (were you running any...

@THIS-Usr try this: go up one level in Warp (to your root storage), right click on the `Inbox` container, and see if you can change the permissions on it (ie,...