OK that explains it. You are basically giving the authors and reviewers a hurry up as it is security related.
Nat and I will give it a higher priority then. Nat and I would like feedback on it quickly then. As you point out it is not a complex extension and has been deployed in a number of cases. As long as we are clear that the authors aren’t trying to slip something through. (In this case:) John B. On Aug 27, 2014, at 11:45 AM, Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofe...@gmx.net> wrote: > Based on the reaction from a few I thought I should add a few words > about this working group last call. > > There is no requirement to wait a specific timeframe after a document > became a WG item to issue a working group last call. > > In this specific case, the document was around for a while and I didn't > see a reason for not-finishing it as soon as possible. > > Additionally, since the document deals with a security vulnerability > that is being exploited today I thought it might make sense to get the > attention from the group to review it. > > Finally, it is also a fairly "simple" document (if there is something as > simple in this working group). > > Ciao > Hannes > > On 08/26/2014 09:32 PM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> This is a Last Call for comments on the "Symmetric Proof of Possession >> for the OAuth Authorization Code Grant" specification. >> >> The document can be found here: >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-spop/ >> >> Please have your comments in no later than September 9th. >> >> Ciao >> Hannes & Derek >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
