[OAUTH-WG] OAuth Assertion Framework draft -10

Draft 10 of the Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0 has been published. It contains non-normative changes that add the "Interoperability Considerations" section that has been discussed on the mailing list, rename "Principal" to "Subject" to

[OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-assertions-10.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Web Authorization Protocol Working Group of the IETF. Title : Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0 Author(s) : Brian Campbell C

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Assertion Draft: Text about Interoperability -- Today

When can we get the IESG to review the SAML Assertions draft? It would be good to get the Assertions draft and the SAML Assertions draft back in sync, from a schedule and process perspective, as comments on one may also reflect on the other. -- Mike -Origin

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Assertion Draft: Text about Interoperability -- Today

Hi Hannes, On 01/19/2013 04:19 PM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > > Thanks for the feedback. I see that a couple of you have decided to go with > option 2. Yep, looks like it. I've moved this back to Feb 7 so the discussion doesn't need to be rushed. S. __

[OAUTH-WG] Minutes from the Conference Call (11th Jan. 2013)

Hi all, here are the minutes from the recent conference call: - OAuth Conference Call - 11th Jan 2013 Participants: - Bill Mills - Hannes Tschofenig - Justin Richer - Phil Hunt - Prateek Mishra - Derek Atkins - Mike Jones - George Fletcher - John Bradley Notes: The slides for the meetin

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Assertion Draft: Text about Interoperability -- Today

Hi Mike, Hi all, Thanks for the feedback. I see that a couple of you have decided to go with option 2. Regarding the comments below. On Jan 19, 2013, at 12:30 AM, Mike Jones wrote: > I can't agree with proceeding with Hannes' rewrite of the interoperability > text, as editorially, it reads