Does Bearer really have to go there? Can it simply be pulled form Bearer?
________________________________
From: John Bradley <[email protected]>
To: Julian Reschke <[email protected]>
Cc: William Mills <[email protected]>; Barry Leiba
<[email protected]>; Mark Nottingham <[email protected]>; OAuth WG
<[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] auth-param syntax, was: OK to post OAuth Bearer draft
15?
Don't get me wrong, I agree that it should be in core.
I just don't want to hold up core for something that only bearer seems to care
about.
If there is consensus that it should be fixed in core then lets do that rather
than leaving it up to bearer, MAC and token types not yet imagined to do it
independently.
John B.
On 2012-01-04, at 7:01 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2012-01-04 22:40, John Bradley wrote:
>> You are correct. the Core spec should include this. However for one
>> reason or another it is not in the core spec and probably will not be,
>> given that it is in last call.
>> ...
>
> The datatracker says:
>
> "AD Evaluation::Revised ID Needed"
> (<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-v2/>)
>
> As far as I recall, this includes other changes needed by the bearer spec.
>
> Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
