Bradley
*Cc:* oauth
*Subject:* Re: [OAUTH-WG] question about the b64token syntax in
draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer
+1
On Mar 11, 2012 7:08 AM, "John Bradley" <mailto:ve7...@ve7jtb.com>> wrote:
+1
Sent from my iPhone
On 2012-03-10, at 12:49 PM, Mike Jones
boun...@ietf.org<mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org>
[mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of
Paul Madsen
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 1:34 PM
To: Brian Campbell
Cc: oauth
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] question about the b64token syntax in
draft-ietf-oauth
ot;
>
> }
>
> ** **
>
> Please send either +1s or objections to this text by mid-day Monday.
> Unless I receive several +1s, to be conservative at this point, I will not
> be including it in Monday’s draft.
>
> ** **
>
> -- Mike****
>
> ** **
>
> *
t; From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Paul Madsen
> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 1:34 PM
> To: Brian Campbell
> Cc: oauth
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] question about the b64token syntax in
> draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer
>
> +1
&g
+1
On 3/11/12 6:05 AM, Manger, James H wrote:
+1
--
James Manger
- Reply message -From: "Mike Jones" Date: Sun, Mar 11, 2012 4:50 am Subject: [OAUTH-WG]
question about the b64token syntax in draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer To: "Paul Madsen", "Brian
Campbell"
+1
--
James Manger
- Reply message -From: "Mike Jones" Date:
Sun, Mar 11, 2012 4:50 am Subject: [OAUTH-WG] question about the b64token
syntax in draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer To: "Paul Madsen" ,
"Brian Campbell" Cc: "oauth"
I plan to make the
to be conservative at this point, I will not be including
it in Monday's draft.
-- Mike
From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Paul
Madsen
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 1:34 PM
To: Brian Campbell
Cc: oauth
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] question about the b64token synt
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 11:45 AM, William Mills
wrote:
Yeah, something as simple as, "Note that the name 'b64token' does not
imply
base64 encoding, see the definition in [[INSERT REFERENCE HERE]]." would
do
it.
-bill
____
From: Brian Campbell
ks,
>> Brian
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 11:45 AM, William Mills
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, something as simple as, "Note that the name 'b64token' does not
>>> imply
>>> base64 encoding, see the def
quot; would do
it.
-bill
________
From: Brian Campbell
To: Mike Jones
Cc: oauth
Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2012 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] question about the b64token syntax in
draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer
Thanks Mike, I think changing the example would be helpful.
However
, 2012 9:16 AM
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] question about the b64token syntax in
draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer
I'd like to propose the following changes and additions, derived
largely from Bill and James suggestions, to
draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer-17. These changes have no normative impact
and only a
t; -bill
>
>
> From: Brian Campbell
> To: Mike Jones
> Cc: oauth
> Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2012 8:23 AM
>
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] question about the b64token syntax in
> draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer
>
> Thanks Mike, I think changin
2012 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] question about the b64token syntax in
draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer
Thanks Mike, I think changing the example would be helpful.
However I think that including some text along the lines of what James
suggested would also be very valuable. I agree that the conn
n Campbell; oauth
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] question about the b64token syntax in
draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer
Brian,
On casual reading of "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol: Bearer
Tokens"* I've encountered several people (including myself) who have
made the assumption that the
r any additional edits for the Bearer spec.
-- Mike
-Original Message-
From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Manger, James H
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 3:33 PM
To: Brian Campbell; oauth
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] questio
--Original Message-
> From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Manger, James H
> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 3:33 PM
> To: Brian Campbell; oauth
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] question about the b64token syntax in
> draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer
>
-- Mike
-Original Message-
From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Manger, James H
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 3:33 PM
To: Brian Campbell; oauth
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] question about the b64token syntax in
draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer
Brian,
> On casu
Brian,
> On casual reading of "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol: Bearer
> Tokens"* I've encountered several people (including myself) who have
> made the assumption that the name b64token implies that some kind of
> base64 encoding/decoding on the access token is taking place between
> the cli
On casual reading of "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol: Bearer
Tokens"* I've encountered several people (including myself) who have
made the assumption that the name b64token implies that some kind of
base64 encoding/decoding on the access token is taking place between
the client and RS.
Diggi
19 matches
Mail list logo
