Thanks for the dicsussion on my comments. Paul
On Tue, Oct 1, 2024 at 11:58 PM Michael Jones <michael_b_jo...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for your review, Paul. My responses are inline below, prefixed by > "Mike>". > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Wouters via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> > Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 6:34 PM > To: The IESG <i...@ietf.org> > Cc: draft-ietf-oauth-resource-metad...@ietf.org; oauth-cha...@ietf.org; > oauth@ietf.org; rifaat.s.i...@gmail.com; rifaat.s.i...@gmail.com > Subject: Paul Wouters' No Objection on > draft-ietf-oauth-resource-metadata-10: (with COMMENT) > > Paul Wouters has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-oauth-resource-metadata-10: 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 > https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ > for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-resource-metadata/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > La mia bella recensione > > > resource_signing_alg_values_supported > No default algorithms are implied if this entry is omitted. > > What does this imply? Does it mean a value can be supplied later? Or > that the request will never be able to succeed? > > Mike> Like many things OAuth, if this information isn't provided, the > participating parties will need to agree on supported values out of band. > For what it's worth, the same language is used multiple times in the > resource server metadata parameter definitions in > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8414.html#section-2. > > In Section 5.1 there is an error message, but unlike earlier in the > document, there seems to be no language support here. I guess that > is a shortcoming of RFC6750. > > Mike> Yes, it is. The good news, though, is that these error messages are > intended as debugging aids for programmers and are not intended to be shown > to end-users. Therefore, the lack of internationalization is less of a > concern. > > I am also interested to hear the response to Orie's DISCUSS > > Mike> Orie and I DISCUSSED, and he won me over. You'll see my response > with a PR allowing the use of query parameters in resource identifiers > shortly. > > Grazie, > -- Mike > > >
_______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list -- oauth@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to oauth-le...@ietf.org
