Thanks, Benoit. I'll double check this before the draft progresses. Thanks, Kathleen
Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 16, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Benoit Claise" <bcla...@cisco.com> wrote: > > Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-21: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I cleared my DISCUSS on the basis that RFC 6755 will be moved to an > informative reference in response to this process issue: IDnits complains > of a normative reference to Informational document RFC 6755, which was > not noted in the Last Call announcement. > > > Editorial Nits: > > S2.2: The paragraph before the actual example uses terminology > inconsistent with RFC 6749: > > s/authorization code grant/authorization grant/ > > _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
