It does not need to have any normative references to 5849. EHL
-----Original Message----- From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bill de hÓra Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 5:47 AM To: David Recordon Cc: Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo); OAuth WG Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 Token Upgrade Extension On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 20:26 +0000, David Recordon wrote: > This draft is now an Internet Draft and I'm curious if anyone has any > feedback on it? > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-recordon-oauth-v2-upgrade-00 > replace [[[ client_id REQUIRED. The client identifier as described in Section 2 of [I-D.ietf.oauth-v2]. client_secret REQUIRED. The client secret as described in Section 2 of [I-D.ietf.oauth-v2]. ]]] with {{{ client_id REQUIRED. The client identifier as described in Section 2 of [I-D.ietf.oauth-v2], the value of which is the oauth_consumer_key as described in [@@@rfc5849] client_secret REQUIRED. The client secret as described in Section 2 of [I-D.ietf.oauth-v2],the value of which is the shared-secret as described in "3.4 Signature" of [@@@rfc5849] }}} The draft needs to reference rfc5849 rather than OAuth 1.0. Bill _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
