Hi Yaron, Dick, Mike,
Please confirm that any and all appropriate IPR disclosures required for full
conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79 have already been filed
for draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bcp-03.
Ciao
Hannes
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
con
I am not aware of any IPR that pertains to the JWT BCP document.
-- Mike
From: Hannes Tschofenig
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 9:36 AM
To: Yaron Sheffer ; Dick Hardt ;
d...@amazon.com; Mike Jones
Cc: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: IPR confirmation
Confirmed, thanks.
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:35 AM Hannes Tschofenig
wrote:
> Hi Yaron, Dick, Mike,
>
>
>
> Please confirm that any and all appropriate IPR disclosures required for
> full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79 have already been
> filed for draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bcp
Confirmed.
Yaron
On 17/07/18 09:35, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
Hi Yaron, Dick, Mike,
Please confirm that any and all appropriate IPR disclosures required for
full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79 have already
been filed for draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bcp-03.
Ciao
Hanne
Authors,
As part of the write-up for the OAuth MTLS document, we need an IPR
disclosure from all of you.
Are you aware of any IPR related to the following OAuth MTLS document?
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-mtls/
Regards,
___
OAuth m
Not that I am aware of.
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 11:06 PM Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
wrote:
> Authors,
>
> As part of the write-up for the OAuth MTLS document, we need an IPR
> disclosure from all of you..
>
> Are you aware of any IPR related to the following OAuth MTLS document?
> https://datatracker.ie
I am not aware of any IPR that pertains to the OAuth MTLS document.
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 8:07 AM, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
wrote:
> Authors,
>
> As part of the write-up for the OAuth MTLS document, we need an IPR
> disclosure from all of you..
>
> Are you aware of any IPR related to the following
I’m not aware of any IPR re the OAuth mTLS draft.
> Am 17.07.2018 um 16:11 schrieb Nat Sakimura :
>
> Not that I am aware of.
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 11:06 PM Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
> wrote:
> Authors,
>
> As part of the write-up for the OAuth MTLS document, we need an IPR
> disclosure from
Hi all,
Here is the shepherd write-up for draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bcp-03:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bcp/shepherdwriteup/
Feedback appreciated.
Ciao
Hannes
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential and may also be privileged. If
Hi William,
please find below my review feedback.
First of all, I think you managed to come up with the minimal extension needed
to address a very relevant use case. Thanks!
- Section 5, last paragraph.
"the new refresh token issued in the Access Token Response (Section 4.1.4 of )
SHOULD in
Hi Dick,
I gave you draft a read and came up with the following questions:
Section 2: How does Party A know it is supposed to conduct a reciprocal OAuth
flow if Party B does not indicate so in the authorization response?
Section 3
Party A is supposed to call the token endpoint of Party B using
Hi Dick,
I like the draft! It puts together some best practices relevant for dynamic
OAuth in a reasonable way.
Some comments:
Section 2:
I appreciate the idea to let the resource determine its resource URI (later
used as aud of the access token). This will allow the RS to segment and group
Thanks for the review Torsten. All good points to be clarified in the doc.
Responses inserted ...
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 11:22 AM, Torsten Lodderstedt <
tors...@lodderstedt.net> wrote:
> Hi Dick,
>
> I gave you draft a read and came up with the following questions:
>
> Section 2: How does Party
Thanks for the review Torsten! ... comments inserted ...
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 11:59 AM, Torsten Lodderstedt <
tors...@lodderstedt.net> wrote:
> Hi Dick,
>
> I like the draft! It puts together some best practices relevant for
> dynamic OAuth in a reasonable way.
>
> Some comments:
>
> Section 2
Hi Torsten,
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 7:57 AM, Torsten Lodderstedt <
tors...@lodderstedt.net> wrote:
> Hi William,
>
> please find below my review feedback.
>
> First of all, I think you managed to come up with the minimal extension
> needed to address a very relevant use case. Thanks!
>
Glad you
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Web Authorization Protocol WG of the IETF.
Title : OAuth 2.0 Mutual TLS Client Authentication and
Certificate Bound Access Tokens
Authors : Brian Ca
-10 just updates the draft-ietf-oauth-discovery reference to RFC8414 now
that 8414 is an actual RFC
-- Forwarded message --
From:
Date: Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 11:48 AM
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-mtls-10.txt
To: i-d-annou...@ietf.org
Cc: oauth@ietf.org
A New
Hi Dick,
I too reviewed the document, and had similar questions in mind.
I agree with Torsten, a figure would make it easier to follow and
understand.
Regards,
Rifaat
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 12:01 PM Dick Hardt wrote:
> Thanks for the review Torsten. All good points to be clarified in the do
Thanks for the feedback!
I'll break out my ASCII art skills.
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
wrote:
> Hi Dick,
>
> I too reviewed the document, and had similar questions in mind.
> I agree with Torsten, a figure would make it easier to follow and
> understand.
>
> Regards,
>
Hi William,
I think it would make sense to add AS metadata fields, which the AS can use to
advertise support for include_granted_scopes and existing_grant.
kind regards,
Torsten.
> Am 17.07.2018 um 19:33 schrieb William Denniss :
>
> Hi Torsten,
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 7:57 AM, Torsten
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Web Authorization Protocol WG of the IETF.
Title : OAuth 2.0 Device Flow for Browserless and Input
Constrained Devices
Authors : William Denniss
21 matches
Mail list logo
