Tony, that doesn’t make sense. An experimental draft would still be a WG draft, and even then this doesn’t match any of the qualifications of “experimental” by IETF definition. It’s arguable whether it be marked “informational” or “standard” since it’s describing best practices more than protocols, but “experimental” doesn’t fit at all.
— Justin > On Jan 20, 2016, at 4:50 AM, Anthony Nadalin <tony...@microsoft.com> wrote: > > After reading this draft I think that this may be better off as an > experimental draft and not a WG draft > > -----Original Message----- > From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Hannes Tschofenig > Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 3:47 AM > To: oauth@ietf.org > Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Call for adoption: OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps > > Hi all, > > this is the call for adoption of OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps, see > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fdatatracker.ietf.org%2fdoc%2fdraft-wdenniss-oauth-native-apps%2f&data=01%7c01%7ctonynad%40microsoft.com%7c2180a2867ac74a039d6108d320c642c2%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=fT7bH5bT8ISndWGCaNj%2f4XGrCz1xFzr0cQdWmGUhk%2fs%3d > > Please let us know by Feb 2nd whether you accept / object to the adoption of > this document as a starting point for work in the OAuth working group. > > Note: If you already stated your opinion at the IETF meeting in Yokohama then > you don't need to re-state your opinion, if you want. > > The feedback at the Yokohama IETF meeting was the following: 16 persons for > doing the work / 0 persons against / 2 persons need more info > > 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
