Thanks, Brian! I agree that this is the best course of action at this point.
Regards, Rifaat On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 3:02 PM Brian Campbell <bcampbell= 40pingidentity....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > While I admit to being somewhat partial to the acronym, it's not for any > sound technical or informational reason. To be honest, before I became > enamored with my own perceived cleverness of TMI-BFF, I also thought the > use of "BFF" in the context of the draft wasn't quite appropriate. > > At this point, I propose that Vittorio and I step back and rework the > draft a bit and then resume the call for adoption after we spin a new > revision. We'll eliminate the problematic use of BFF and address some of > the more straightforward feedback from the interim. > > > > On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 3:03 PM Aaron Parecki <aa...@parecki.com> wrote: > >> Okay, I have come around to this idea and agree that we shouldn't use >> "BFF" to refer to this pattern. The only reason I am continuing the >> discussion in this thread is that if we agree we should avoid the term BFF >> for this draft, I would like to see it renamed before it is adopted, to >> avoid any confusion at the start. >> >> Aaron >> >> >> On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 10:28 AM Jim Manico <j...@manicode.com> wrote: >> >>> +1 Mr. Hardt. BFF aims to avoid access tokens in UA's so TMI-BFF is a >>> badly branded name that will add confusion. >>> >>> - Jim >>> On 5/4/21 11:25 AM, Dick Hardt wrote: >>> >>> My concern with BFF is that the common meaning is what the document >>> calls Full BFF -- so what many readers will assume is BFF is not what the >>> document is referring to. >>> ᐧ >>> >>> On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 8:03 AM Aaron Parecki <aa...@parecki.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I support adoption. I'm also fine with the BFF acronym since it's >>>> common in the software development world already. If anything, the TMI >>>> acronym is the least strong of the two as it's missing a letter from the >>>> full name of the draft. >>>> >>>> Aaron >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 7:40 AM Dick Hardt <dick.ha...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'm supportive -- but am concerned with the BFF acronym. >>>>> ᐧ >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 3:00 PM Rifaat Shekh-Yusef < >>>>> rifaat.s.i...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> All, >>>>>> >>>>>> This is a call for adoption for the *Token Mediating and Session >>>>>> Information Backend for Frontend* as a WG document: >>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bertocci-oauth2-tmi-bff/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Please, provide your feedback on the mailing list by *May 17th*. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Rifaat & Hannes >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> --- >>>> Aaron Parecki >>>> https://aaronparecki.com >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OAuth mailing listOAuth@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth >>> >>> -- >>> Jim Manico >>> Manicode Securityhttps://www.manicode.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> OAuth mailing list >> OAuth@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth >> > > *CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and > privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any > review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. > If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender > immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any file attachments from > your computer. Thank you.*_______________________________________________ > 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
