to:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Richer, Justin P.
> Sent: Friday, April 01, 2011 5:19 AM
> To: Eran Hammer-Lahav; OAuth WG
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Reques to drop section 3
>
> -1 once again
>
> I want to keep the client password mechanism in core as it reflects the
I agree with Justin.
From: "Richer, Justin P."
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav ; OAuth WG
Sent: Friday, April 1, 2011 5:18 AM
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Reques to drop section 3
-1 once again
I want to keep the client password mechanism in core as it reflec
Withdrawn. I just don't care enough to waste any more time on this. I'll wait
for the revised text assigned at the meeting and will integrate at the
direction of the chairs.
EHL
On Apr 1, 2011, at 2:14, "Eran Hammer-Lahav"
mailto:e...@hueniverse.com>> wrote:
There was (still is) a long heated
---
From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Richer, Justin P.
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2011 5:19 AM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav; OAuth WG
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Reques to drop section 3
-1 once again
I want to keep the client password mechanism in core as it reflects the
same arguments as the
assertion grant type.
-- Justin
From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Eran
Hammer-Lahav [e...@hueniverse.com]
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2011 5:14 AM
To: OAuth WG
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Reques to drop section 3
of these technologies we need an extension point here.
From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Eran
Hammer-Lahav
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2011 2:14 AM
To: OAuth WG
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Reques to drop section 3
There was (still is) a long heated debate at the WG
There was (still is) a long heated debate at the WG meeting today about client
authentication and the dropped client assertion credentials section. I want to
repeat my past view (and this time post it as an open issue), that this entire
section makes no sense in this document. OAuth should not b
