+1 Sent from my iPhone
On 2012-01-20, at 8:50 PM, Dick Hardt <dick.ha...@gmail.com> wrote: > +! > > On Jan 20, 2012, at 4:20 PM, Torsten Lodderstedt wrote: > >> MUST sounds reasonable >> >> >> >> Eran Hammer <e...@hueniverse.com> schrieb: >> The current text: >> >> If the issued access token scope >> is different from the one requested by the client, the authorization >> server SHOULD include the "scope" response parameter to inform the >> client of the actual scope granted. >> >> Stephen asked why not a MUST. I think it should be MUST. Any disagreement? >> >> EHL >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
_______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
