[OAUTH-WG] Feedback on OAuth 2.0 Protected Resource Metadata

Hi, Can I please request that additional metadata types for describing resource access requirements be included from the RAR specification (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9396#name-relationship-to-the-scope-p) in the https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-oauth-resource-metadata-

[OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 Protected Resource Metadata draft addressing reviews since IETF Last Call

Aaron Parecki and I published a new version the "OAuth 2.0 Protected Resource Metadata" specification that addresses the review comments received since the IETF Last Call. Per the history entries, the changes were: * Added metadata values declaring support for DPoP an

[OAUTH-WG] Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-oauth-resource-metadata-08

Bo, the newly published version of https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-resource-metadata/ incorporates the changes to address your review comments. Thanks again! -- Mike -Original Message- From: Michael Jones

[OAUTH-WG] Re: Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-oauth-resource-metadata-08

David, the newly published version of https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-resource-metadata/ incorporates the changes to address your review comments. Thanks again! -- Mike -Original Message- From: David Mande

[OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-resource-metadata-09.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-oauth-resource-metadata-09.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Web Authorization Protocol (OAUTH) WG of the IETF. Title: OAuth 2.0 Protected Resource Metadata Authors: Michael B. Jones Phil Hunt Aaron Parecki Name:draft-ie

[OAUTH-WG] Re: WGLC for SD-JWT

On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 10:17 AM Brian Campbell wrote: > > Watson, > > Thank you for your comments during the Vancouver meeting and subsequently on > the mailing list. Your input helped initiate some valuable discussions, and > I’ve incorporated additional text into the Unlinkability subsection

[OAUTH-WG] Re: WGLC for SD-JWT

Watson, Thank you for your comments during the Vancouver meeting and subsequently on the mailing list. Your input helped initiate some valuable discussions, and I’ve incorporated additional text into the Unlinkability subsection under the Privacy Considerations to reflect the general consensus tha