Re: [OAUTH-WG] [Errata Verified] RFC7800 (6187)

2020-05-31 Thread Pete Resnick
ot;Verified", IMO.) But that's not about applying judgement; that's changing the definition of the terms used. pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best ___ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Re: [OAUTH-WG] [Errata Verified] RFC7800 (6187)

2020-05-30 Thread Pete Resnick
those in other states, will be displayed. (Yes, that link 404s at the moment, I assume a caching issue.) -Ben On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 10:55:01PM -0500, Pete Resnick wrote: "Verified", not "Hold For Document Update"? pr On 30 May 2020, at 20:34, RFC Errata System wrote: T

Re: [OAUTH-WG] [Errata Verified] RFC7800 (6187)

2020-05-30 Thread Pete Resnick
ou may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6187 -- Status: Verified Type: Editorial Reported by: Pete Resnick Date Reported: 2020-05-26 Verified by: Benjamin Kaduk (IESG) Section: 7.1 Original Text - [JWK]

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Richard Barnes' Discuss on draft-ietf-oauth-assertions-17: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

2014-10-17 Thread Pete Resnick
assertions, and that future extensions for HoK might have different requirements, is all that is being asked for here. pr -- Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/> Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478 ___ OAuth mailing lis

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Pete Resnick's No Objection on draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-21: (with COMMENT)

2014-10-16 Thread Pete Resnick
On 10/16/14 7:56 AM, Brian Campbell wrote: Thanks for your review and feedback on this one too, Pete. Replies are inline below... On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Pete Resnick mailto:presn...@qti.qualcomm.com>> wrote: 2.1/2.2 - This paragraph shows why I don't like haphazard

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Pete Resnick's No Objection on draft-ietf-oauth-assertions-17: (with COMMENT)

2014-10-15 Thread Pete Resnick
On 10/15/14 6:06 PM, Brian Campbell wrote: Thanks for your review and feedback, Pete. Replies are inline below... Thanks for addressing the comments, including Barry's followup. Just on the questions: On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Pete Resnick mailto:presn...@qti.qualcomm.com>

[OAUTH-WG] Pete Resnick's No Objection on draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-10: (with COMMENT)

2014-10-14 Thread Pete Resnick
Pete Resnick has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-10: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to

[OAUTH-WG] Pete Resnick's No Objection on draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-21: (with COMMENT)

2014-10-14 Thread Pete Resnick
Pete Resnick has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-21: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer

[OAUTH-WG] Pete Resnick's No Objection on draft-ietf-oauth-assertions-17: (with COMMENT)

2014-10-14 Thread Pete Resnick
Pete Resnick has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-oauth-assertions-17: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to