Hi
This Is not the first time I support this draft and say that, two years
ago, I was looking for an RS metadata scheme for the spid attribuite
authorities specification
I found Mike's I-D and considered the deadline I had, together with other
collegues of other national agencies, we decided to u
If it makes sense, we could add an "Implementation Status" section, like it
is proposed in this RFC: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7942.html
On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 10:43 AM Michael Jones
wrote:
> OpenID Federation implementations use the Protected Resource Metadata
> definitions in this spe
John Doi
On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 9:13 PM Michael Jones
wrote:
> OpenID Federation implementations use the Protected Resource Metadata
> definitions in this specification. Among others, Connect2ID and Authlete
> have OpenID Federation implementations. I know that it’s deployed in the
> Italian
Thanks Rifaat, looks like a packed agenda!
On Tue, Jul 9, 2024 at 10:30 AM Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
wrote:
> All,
>
> Here is our draft agenda for our 3 OAuth sessions at IETF120:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-120-oauth/
>
> Please, take a look and let us know what you think.
>
> Regards,
OpenID Federation implementations use the Protected Resource Metadata
definitions in this specification. Among others, Connect2ID and Authlete have
OpenID Federation implementations. I know that it's deployed in the Italian
SPID CIE national federation.
I am not aware of any IPR associated with this specification.
-- Mike
From: Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 9:06:26 AM
To: oauth
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 Protected Resource Metadata - IPR Disclosure
Mike, Phil, Aaron,
As part of the she
I am not aware of any IPR that pertain to this document.
Aaron
On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 9:07 AM Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
wrote:
> Mike, Phil, Aaron,
>
> As part of the shepherd write-up, all authors of the OAuth 2.0 Protected
> Resource Metadata draft must confirm that any and all appropriate *IPR
>
Mike, Phil, Aaron,
As part of the shepherd write-up, all authors of the OAuth 2.0 Protected
Resource Metadata draft must confirm that any and all appropriate *IPR
disclosures* required for full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78
and BCP 79 have been disclosed.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/
All,
As part of the shepherd write-up for the OAuth 2.0 Protected Resource
Metadata document, we are looking for information about implementations of
this draft.
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-oauth-resource-metadata-06.html
Please, reply on the mailing list with any implementations t
All,
Mike and I met yesterday and discussed this.
My concern was with the potential of a downgrade attack if there is a MITM
between the client and the resource server.
It seems that the draft defined a protection against such an attack as
described in section 3.3.
The next step is the shepherd w
10 matches
Mail list logo
