Accepted into the tracker. Thanks, Brian! b.
On 4 January 2011 08:26, Brian Campbell <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Peter. I did update the draft and submit it with a > draft-ietf-oauth- prefix. The I-D submission summary page for it is at > https://datatracker.ietf.org/idst/status.cgi?submission_id=28905 > > On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> wrote: >> <hat type='AD'/> >> >> Agreed. >> >> I'll poke the chairs about accepting this as a WG item. :) >> >> Peter >> >> On 12/14/10 6:26 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote: >>> Prepare a new draft if needed and submit it with draft-ietf-oauth- >>> prefix. One of the chairs will need to approve it and it will be >>> published. I think we have wide consensus for this and this was >>> already proposed a long time ago with no objections. >>> >>> EHL >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- From: Brian Campbell >>>> [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 14, >>>> 2010 10:18 AM To: Eran Hammer-Lahav Cc: Torsten Lodderstedt; oauth >>>> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Fwd: New Version Notification for >>>> draft-campbell- oauth-saml-01 >>>> >>>> I don't have any objection to it and think it's probably cleaner. >>>> >>>> Previously I'd informally asked that the SAML profile be considered >>>> a WG item and I don't think there was any objection. What needs to >>>> be done to make that happen? >>>> >>>> If you/we take this approach, what else will you need from me? >>>> >>>> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Torsten made a good argument that now that we combined assertions >>>>> and >>>> extensions into a single mechanism, it does not make sense to make >>>> the 'assertion' parameter required, and that some extensions will >>>> be confusing with such a parameter name. In addition, the recent >>>> document split demoted this specification from 'core' to >>>> 'framework' which is more friendly to extensions and companion >>>> specifications. >>>>> >>>>> I would suggest we drop the assertion parameter from the spec, >>>>> but add a >>>> directly reference to the SAML assertion specification and give an >>>> example showing the parameter. This will remove the normative >>>> language (which really doesn't belong there - something I've long >>>> maintained), but will keep the SAML assertion option on equal >>>> ground (directly demonstrated in the spec). After all, you can't >>>> implement assertions just by reading the framework spec, you still >>>> need the SAML work. >>>>> >>>>> This will require moving the SAML into a WG item (not a must but >>>>> best) >>>> which I am supportive of and would like to see happen quickly (in a >>>> few days). >>>>> >>>>> Thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> EHL >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Brian Campbell >>>>>> [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 14, >>>>>> 2010 8:11 AM To: Torsten Lodderstedt Cc: Eran Hammer-Lahav; >>>>>> oauth Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Fwd: New Version Notification >>>>>> for draft-campbell- oauth-saml-01 >>>>>> >>>>>> Future revisions of this SAML draft will build off whatever >>>>>> assertion/extension mechanism is provided by the core framework >>>>>> spec. However, some compelling reasons were previously given >>>>>> for keeping the 'assertion' (one thread on the topic: >>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg04401.html) >>>>>> >>>>>> >> parameter in core. Has the thinking on that changed? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Torsten Lodderstedt >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 14.12.2010 um 04:19 schrieb Eran Hammer-Lahav >>>>>> <[email protected]>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think the 'assertion' parameter should be moved into this >>>>>>>> draft and >>>>>> defined there. This will also facilitate its proper definition >>>>>> and status (required, singular, etc.). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> EHL >>>>>>>> >>>>> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > OAuth mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth > _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
