Dear all,

thanks for this interesting work! I think that there's some editorial work
that should be done
on terminology (e.g. a consistent use of JOSE header parameter, HTTP header
field, ...)
and some simplification will really make the spec more easy to read.

For example, once defined that the syntax of DPOP is a JWS, it is redundant
to
further state that DPOP value MUST be a JWS.
Moreover there are security considerations all throughout the document,
that should probably
be moved to the #Security section.

I will provide further feedback in the next few days.

I'm providing some PRs on the repo: feel free to comment there.

- https://github.com/danielfett/draft-dpop/pulls/ioggstream

Kind regards,
R.

Il giorno lun 28 mar 2022 alle ore 14:01 Rifaat Shekh-Yusef <
rifaat.s.i...@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> All,
>
> As discussed during the IETF meeting in *Vienna* last week, this is a *WG
> Last Call *for the *DPoP* document:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-dpop/
>
> Please, provide your feedback on the mailing list by April 11th.
>
> 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

Reply via email to