+1 -- Cheers, Maciej (sent from my tablet) On Sep 11, 2014 5:07 PM, "Phil Hunt" <phil.h...@oracle.com> wrote:
> +1. Experimental seems best here. > > Phil > > > On Sep 11, 2014, at 9:03, "Richer, Justin P." <jric...@mitre.org> wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > That was the key line that I took from the guidelines as well and this > was my understanding of the discussion in Toronto. > > > > -- Justin > > > >> On Sep 11, 2014, at 12:02 PM, John Bradley <ve7...@ve7jtb.com> wrote: > >> > >> I think this fits. > >> > >> • If the IETF may publish something based on this on the standards > track once we know how well this one works, it's Experimental. This is the > typical case of not being able to decide which protocol is "better" before > we have experience of dealing with them from a stable specification. Case > in point: "PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification" (RFC 3208) > >> > >> If we publish something it may or may not look like the current spec > but getting some experience with the current spec will inform that decision. > >> > >> John B. > >>> On Sep 11, 2014, at 12:55 PM, Phil Hunt <phil.h...@oracle.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Interesting. The definitions in that don't correspond with what ADs > and other groups are doing. > >>> > >>> I heard httpbis using experimental as a placeholder for a draft that > didn't have full consensus to bring back later. > >>> > >>> That was the feel I had in Toronto-that we weren't done but it was > time to publish something. > >>> > >>> Reading the actual definition i would say neither fits. Ugh. > >>> > >>> Phil > >>> > >>>> On Sep 11, 2014, at 8:01, "Richer, Justin P." <jric...@mitre.org> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> According to the guidelines here: > >>>> > >>>> https://www.ietf.org/iesg/informational-vs-experimental.html > >>>> > >>>> And the discussion in Toronto, it's clearly experimental. > >>>> > >>>> -- Justin > >>>> > >>>>> On Sep 11, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Anthony Nadalin <tony...@microsoft.com> > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Is "experimental" the correct classification? Maybe "informational" > is more appropriate as both of these were discussed. > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Hannes > Tschofenig > >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 4:50 PM > >>>>> To: oauth@ietf.org > >>>>> Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration Management Protocol: > Next Steps? > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi all, > >>>>> > >>>>> in response to the discussions at the last IETF meeting the authors > of the "Dynamic Client Registration Management Protocol" > >>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-05 > have changed the document type to "Experimental". > >>>>> > >>>>> We need to make a decision about the next steps for the document and > we see the following options: > >>>>> > >>>>> a) Publish it as an experimental RFC > >>>>> > >>>>> b) Remove it from the working group and ask an AD to shepherd it > >>>>> > >>>>> c) Remove it from the working group and let the authors publish it > via the independent submission track. > >>>>> > >>>>> In any case it would be nice to let folks play around with it and > then, after some time, come back to determine whether there is enough > interest to produce a standard. > >>>>> > >>>>> Please let us know what you think! > >>>>> > >>>>> 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 > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> 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
