The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6750, "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework: Bearer Token Usage".
-------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5335 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Kavindu Dodanduwa <[email protected]> Section: 2.1 Original Text ------------- b64token Corrected Text -------------- token68 Notes ----- Usage of b64token is confusing. Definition is self explanatory but could be easily confused with Base64. RFC7235 defines token68. Following some old RFC draft discussions (http://w3-org.9356.n7.nabble.com/p7-rename-b64token-to-token68-to-avoid-misunderstandings-td108256.html) I found that b64token was renamed to token68. I believe it's appropriate to use naming of token68 (instead of b64token) in RFC6750. So that it is less confusing as well as refers to an existing standard. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC6750 (draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer-23) -------------------------------------- Title : The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework: Bearer Token Usage Publication Date : October 2012 Author(s) : M. Jones, D. Hardt Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Web Authorization Protocol Area : Security Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
