I read the proposed spec and it's evident substantial work has gone into
it. Congratulations for this.
How does the 1st party flow compare to the (deprecated in OAuth 2.1)
password grant? People with existing 1st party apps that rely on the
password grant or consider using it are going to look
Those changes sound good, thanks!
Op 2024-09-10 om 22:22 schreef Michael Jones:
Thanks David. My replies are inline below, prefixed by "Mike>".
-Original Message-
From: David Mandelberg via Datatracker
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2024 3:42 PM
To: sec...@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-oauth-reso
Thanks Neil,
That is indeed an error. Thanks for catching that. We'll get it fixed. I
see how that other part is a bit confusing too and will look at improving
how those pieces flow together. And also maybe fix some other stuff in that
area while we're at it, like inadequate salt length in at leas
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 8:18 AM Judith Kahrer wrote:
> I gave the -12 revision a read. Thanks for the great work Brian, Kristina
> and Dr. Fett.
>
Thanks for the thanks Judith. And also thanks for using the proper
salutation for Daniel.
> One thing that I find confusing is the term “Issuer-sig
Thanks Judith,
Some additional discussion on your comments/questions/suggestions is inline
below.
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 7:48 AM Judith Kahrer wrote:
>
> I agree, I also think the intro is hard to read. There are some more
> points that I want to add with regard to the introduction:
>
> > The
Thanks Dick,
Some hopefully not-difficult-to-parse responses are inline below.
On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 6:25 AM Dick Hardt wrote:
> A while ago in an in-person meeting I provided feedback that the
> introduction was difficult to parse. It still is. A few comments inserted
> to illustrate.
>
> I'l
Hi,
I have 22+ years of experience in the area of IAM and I would like to
contribute towards the development of the protocol. Please let me know how
can volunteer and contribute.
Thanks
Badal
___
OAuth mailing list -- oauth@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send
