Does it make sense to have default OIDC information

[CannonLock]

Well creating the new OIDC flow I have noticed there are defaults that seem very unique to the CHTC.

Most notably:

OIDC:
  Issuer: "https://cilogon.org"
  AuthorizationEndpoint: "https://cilogon.org/authorize"
  DeviceAuthEndpoint: "https://cilogon.org/oauth2/device_authorization"
  TokenEndpoint: "https://cilogon.org/oauth2/token"
  UserInfoEndpoint: "https://cilogon.org/oauth2/userinfo"

Does it really make sense to have these as defaults?

My main issue with them is when guiding users through a flow to set these values gets tricky when there are defaults that I am guessing are not so likely they are reasonable to assume.

Since these values have to be considered and chosen carefully no matter what I don't think it makes sense to have defaults for them.

[brianaydemir]

I would expect that for the typical OIDC provider, it should be sufficient to set only OIDC.Issuer. The other values can be/will be discovered via .well-known/openid-configuration.

[CannonLock]

@brianaydemir The discussion I am hoping to have isn't what values to set.

I am curious to consider if cilogon.org is a reasonable default for this.

[brianaydemir]

It'd be reasonable for OIDC.Issuer and friends to have no default value.

That said, if someone is trying to set up an OIDC integration, they need to get a client from somewhere. Ideally, we'd have documentation for a few "common" providers.

[CannonLock]

Yup agreed, was thinking the same thing.