The registration is a simple process. You write a draft and get the designated 
expert to review. They can decide to wait until the document is 
published/approved or if they think it is likely to be approved, get the 
registration request published earlier. They can also reject it with a reason.

I would encourage you to contact the link registry list and ask for feedback 
before making the official request which you can do once the draft is stable.

EH

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> Of William Mills
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 11:20 AM
> To: Goix Laurent Walter; Peter Saint-Andre
> Cc: O Auth WG; Apps Discuss
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] R: [apps-discuss] OAuth discovery registration.
> 
> On the informational status, that seemed right, but I honestly don't know
> what the correct choice is here.   The actual registration happens via e-mail 
> I
> believe, not via this document.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback!
> 
> -bill
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Goix Laurent Walter <[email protected]>
> > To: Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]>; William Mills
> > <[email protected]>
> > Cc: O Auth WG <[email protected]>; Apps Discuss <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 9:44 AM
> > Subject: R: [apps-discuss] [OAUTH-WG] OAuth discovery registration.
> >
> >T hank you William for this initiative.
> >
> > I had similar concerns than Peter on authn vs authz.
> >
> > Under section 4.1.1 I would suggest to use "oauth2-authorize" instead
> > of "oauth2-authenticator", to be consistent with the "oauth2-token"
> > pattern and with the concepts of the oauth2 draft.
> >
> > The header of the pages still reference sasl/gss-api and would need to
> > be updated.
> >
> > Also, an example and/or use case section could be beneficial, e.g. to
> > describe its usage in an xrd document. Other use cases may be mentioned
> as well probably.
> >
> > I have also noticed that your draft is mentioned as "informational".
> > It is indeed your target or only a typo?
> >
> > Thanks
> > walter
> >
> >>  -----Messaggio originale-----
> >>  Da: [email protected]
> >> [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Per
> >>  conto di Peter Saint-Andre
> >>  Inviato: mercoledì 13 giugno 2012 17.48
> >>  A: William Mills
> >>  Cc: O Auth WG; Apps Discuss
> >>  Oggetto: Re: [apps-discuss] [OAUTH-WG] OAuth discovery registration.
> >>
> >>  On 6/13/12 9:27 AM, William Mills wrote:
> >>  >
> >>  > Since for the OAUTH SASL mechanism I need discovery for clients to
> >> > work, and I had to rip the in-band discovery out of that mechanism,
> >> > and I need it defined somewhere, I've drafted a small doc for the
> >> > registration of link relation types for OAuth.  It's too late in
> > the
> >>  > process to get this into the core OAuth 2 spec, and it doesn't
> > really
> >>  > fit in the WebFinger. Submission info provided below.
> >>
> >>  Hi Bill, overall this looks good. A few nits:
> >>
> >>  OLD
> >>     This document defines the LRDD [RFC5988] link type registrations
> >> for
> >>     the OAuth [I-D.ietf-oauth-v2] authentication framework.  These
> >> link
> >>     types are used during the endpoint discovery process using Web
> >> Host
> >>     Metadata [I-D.hammer-hostmeta] and Webfinger
> >>     [I-D.jones-appsawg-webfinger] by clients needing to discover the
> >>     authentication endpoints for a service or site.  It additionally
> >>     defines link type registrations for OAuth 1.0a [RFC5849].
> >>
> >>  NEW
> >>     This document defines the Link-based Resource Descriptor
> >>     Documents (LRDD) [RFC6415] link type registrations for the
> >>     OAuth [I-D.ietf-oauth-v2] authorization framework.  These link
> >>     types are used during the endpoint discovery process using Web
> >>     Host Metadata [RFC6415] and Webfinger
> >>     [I-D.jones-appsawg-webfinger] by clients needing to discover the
> >>     authorization, token, and access token endpoints for an OAuth2
> >>     service or site.  It additionally defines link type registrations
> >> for  OAuth
> >>     1.0a [RFC5849] request initiation endpoints, authorization
> >> endpoints,
> >>     and token endpoints.
> >>
> >>  In Section 4.1.1, you register an "OAuth 2 Authentication
> > Endpoint",
> >>  however draft-ietf-oauth-v2 defines only an authorization endpoint,
> >> a  token endpoint, and an access token endpoint. Whence this
> >> "authentication endpoint"? Is it just a typo?
> >>
> >>  Also, is the lack of a link type for OAuth2 access token endpoints
> >> an  oversight? It seems so.
> >>
> >>  You have "Reference: [[this document]]" but I think you want:
> >>
> >>  Reference: draft-ietf-oauth-v2
> >>
> >>  and
> >>
> >>  Reference: RFC 5849
> >>
> >>  You can remove the reference for draft-hammer-hostmeta (RFC 6415 has
> >> what you need).
> >>
> >>  Peter
> >>
> >>  --
> >>  Peter Saint-Andre
> >>  https://stpeter.im/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  _______________________________________________
> >>  apps-discuss mailing list
> >>  [email protected]
> >>  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
> >
> > Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente
> > alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione
> > derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente
> > vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete
> > cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di
> > provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.
> >
> > This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain
> > privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only.
> > Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is
> > unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete
> > this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail,
> Thanks.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Reply via email to