ather than "not greater"? If for
instance the sequence number is lower, then should not the procedure
in 5.10.3 of RFC9200 make such an Access Token be rejected in the
first place?
==>MT
Of course, the trap of double negation...
Simply fixed by replacing "claim not greater than&qu
Hi Marco,
Thanks a lot for your review! We've addressed your comments in the
latest version -05.
Please see inline for detailed replies.
Best,
/Marco
On 2023-03-23 14:21, Marco Rasori wrote:
Hi all,
Please, see below my WGLC comments.
Best,
Marco
[Section 1]
* The sentences
"This do
verria
mailto:sechever...@sei.cmu.edu>>; Marco Tiloca
mailto:marco.tiloca=40ri...@dmarc.ietf.org>>;
Daniel Migault mailto:mglt.i...@gmail.com>>; Ace Wg
mailto:ace@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [Ace] WGLC draft-ietf-ace-revoked-token-notification-04.txt
Hello,
Same for me: I am not aware o
> accepting" is not part of critera 1 or 2.
>
>
> *"iii) has the sequence number encoded in the 'cti' claim not greater than
> the highest sequence number among the expired Access Tokens specifying the
> 'exi' claim"
>
> Should this sa
es that MAX_DIFF_BATCH is not a single instance parameter, and in
Section 9 it states that a registered device may receive MAX_DIFF_BATCH from
the AS during registration. Why is MAX_DIFF_BATCH not a single instance
parameter, but MAX_N is? Or rather, why are they not both single instance, or
Hi all,
Please, see below my WGLC comments.
Best,
Marco
[Section 1]
* The sentences
"This document specifies a method for allowing registered devices
to access and possibly subscribe to a Token Revocation List (TRL)
resource on the AS, in order to obtain an updated list of revoked,
but yet
As a co-author: I am not aware of any IPR, and I am willing to co-author the
document.
Francesca
From: Ace on behalf of Daniel Migault
Date: Monday, 13 March 2023 at 18:37
To: Ace Wg
Subject: [Ace] WGLC draft-ietf-ace-revoked-token-notification-04.txt
Hi everyone,
This email starts a WGLC
: Re: [Ace] WGLC draft-ietf-ace-revoked-token-notification-04.txt
Hello,
Same for me: I am not aware on IPR on my side and confirm I am willing to
co-author the document.
Thanks,
Grace Lewis
__
Grace A. Lewis, Ph.D.
Principal Researcher
Grace Hopper
From: Ace on behalf of Sebastian Echeverria
Date: Monday, March 13, 2023 at 6:49 PM
To: Marco Tiloca , Daniel Migault
, Ace Wg
Subject: Re: [Ace] WGLC draft-ietf-ace-revoked-token-notification-04.txt
Hello,
I am also not aware of any IPR on our side, and I confirm I’m willing to
co-a
Date: Monday, March 13, 2023 at 3:11 PM
To: Daniel Migault , Ace Wg
Subject: Re: [Ace] WGLC draft-ietf-ace-revoked-token-notification-04.txt
Hi Daniel and all,
On 2023-03-13 18:36, Daniel Migault wrote:
Hi everyone,
This email starts a WGLC for draft-ietf-ace-revoked-token-notification which
Hi Daniel and all,
On 2023-03-13 18:36, Daniel Migault wrote:
Hi everyone,
This email starts a WGLC for draft-ietf-ace-revoked-token-notification
which ends on March 27. Please provide your support and feed backs by
that time. We will take advantage of the IETF116 session to solve any
remain
Hi everyone,
This email starts a WGLC for draft-ietf-ace-revoked-token-notification
which ends on March 27. Please provide your support and feed backs by that
time. We will take advantage of the IETF116 session to solve any remaining
discussions on that draft.
I am also looking for someone intere
12 matches
Mail list logo
