Hi,

You can find remote participation info at:

http://www.ietf.org/meeting/84/remote-participation.html

Hannes, I am assuming that you will set up as the WebEx Host during the
meeting tomorrow?  I'm just not 100% sure how to audio *in* remotely.
Worst case I'll just use Jabber to send back in.

-derek

Torsten Lodderstedt <[email protected]> writes:

> Hi Derek,
>
> I will give it a try. Where can I find the respective meeting data?
>
> regards,
> Torsten.
>
> Am 30.07.2012 19:55, schrieb Derek Atkins:
>> We will have a WebEx available if you can attend remotely?
>> That's my plan, as I cannot make Vancouver this week.
>>
>> -derek
>>
>> Torsten Lodderstedt <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> Hi Hannes,
>>>
>>> I'm unfortunately had to cancel my trip to IETF-84. Phil will cover
>>> the status
>>> of the threat model document. But none of the authors of the
>>> Revocation Draft
>>> will be attending. So I would ask you to postpone the presentation
>>> of this I-D
>>> to the next IETF meeting as well.
>>>
>>> best regards,
>>> Torsten.
>>>
>>> Am 23.07.2012 17:02, schrieb Thomas Hardjono:
>>>
>>>     Hannes, Derek,
>>>
>>>     Would it possible to postpone presentation/discussion of the
>>> Dyn-Reg
>>>     draft (Dynamic Client Registration Protocol) to the
>>> Atlanta/November
>>>     IETF meeting?
>>>
>>>     The reason is that none of the proposers will be attending the
>>>     Vancouver IETF in-person.
>>>
>>>     Thanks.
>>>
>>>     /thomas/
>>>
>>>     __________________________________________
>>>
>>>         -----Original Message-----
>>>         From: [email protected]
>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On
>>>
>>>     Behalf
>>>
>>>         Of Hannes Tschofenig
>>>         Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 1:58 PM
>>>         To: John Bradley
>>>         Cc: [email protected] WG
>>>         Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Meeting slot for the Vancouver IETF
>>> meeting
>>>         requested
>>>
>>>         Hi all,
>>>
>>>         I have uploaded an agenda for the meeting.
>>>
>>>         I am assuming that all these items do not require
>>> discussion time
>>>         anymore:
>>>         * draft-ietf-oauth-assertions
>>>         * draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer
>>>         * draft-ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns
>>>         * draft-ietf-oauth-v2
>>>         * draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer
>>>
>>>         Hence, we can focus on the new items. As discussed in the
>>> mail below
>>>
>>>     I
>>>
>>>         put a separate slot for discussion of the
>>> holder-of-the-key/MAC
>>>
>>>     token
>>>
>>>         security discussion on the agenda. I would suggest that a
>>> couple of
>>>
>>>     us
>>>
>>>         meeting during the IETF week to work together on a
>>> presentation that
>>>         provides some concrete suggestions for next steps to the
>>> rest of the
>>>         group.
>>>
>>>         I also put the following persons on the spot for the
>>> presentations
>>>
>>>     of
>>>
>>>         working group items:
>>>
>>>         - OAuth Dynamic Client Registration Protocol (Thomas)
>>>         - JSON Web Token (JWT) (Mike)
>>>         - JSON Web Token (JWT) Bearer Token Profiles for OAuth 2.0
>>> (Mike)
>>>         - Token Revocation (Torsten)
>>>         - SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Profiles for OAuth 2.0 (Brian)
>>>         - OAuth Use Cases (Zachary)
>>>
>>>         Let me know if you want someone else to give the
>>> presentation.
>>>
>>>         As a preparation for the meeting it would be good if you
>>> could
>>>         (a) identify the open issues with your document, and
>>>         (b) find one or two reviewers to have a look at your
>>> document during
>>>         the next two weeks.
>>>
>>>         Ciao
>>>         Hannes
>>>
>>>         On Jul 15, 2012, at 5:59 PM, John Bradley wrote:
>>>
>>>             Yes we need to get clearer on the the threats and use
>>> cases.
>>>
>>>             I think Phil Hunt has some though there is likely
>>> overlap.
>>>
>>>             Part of the problem with MAC was people never agreed on
>>> the
>>>
>>>     threats
>>>
>>>         it was mitigating.
>>>
>>>             I can present something or coordinate with Tony or Phil.
>>>
>>>             John B.
>>>
>>>             On 2012-07-14, at 9:36 PM, Anthony Nadalin wrote:
>>>
>>>                 How about a few min on proof-of-possession
>>> requirements? I can
>>>
>>>         present our use cases and requirements
>>>
>>>                 -----Original Message-----
>>>                 From: [email protected]
>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On
>>>
>>>         Behalf Of Mike Jones
>>>
>>>                 Sent: Friday, July 13, 2012 4:42 PM
>>>                 To: Hannes Tschofenig; [email protected] WG
>>>                 Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Meeting slot for the
>>> Vancouver IETF
>>>
>>>     meeting
>>>
>>>         requested
>>>
>>>                 I'm willing to do 5 minutes on the status of the
>>> Core and Bearer
>>>
>>>         documents.
>>>
>>>                 I'm willing to give an update on JWT and the JWT
>>> Bearer -
>>>
>>>     probably
>>>
>>>         15 minutes.  It's probably good that we're a day after the
>>> JOSE WG
>>>         meeting, given the JWT dependency upon the JOSE specs.
>>>
>>>                 I'm willing to be part of a discussion on the
>>> Assertions draft,
>>>
>>>     but
>>>
>>>         would appreciate doing this with Brian and/or Chuck - I'm
>>> guessing
>>>
>>>     15
>>>
>>>         minutes for that as well.  (I'm not certain this will be
>>> needed, but
>>>         I'd like to review the recent changes before saying that
>>> it's not.)
>>>
>>>                 Looking forward to seeing many of you in Vancouver!
>>>
>>>                                                 -- Mike
>>>
>>>                 -----Original Message-----
>>>                 From: [email protected]
>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On
>>>
>>>         Behalf Of Hannes Tschofenig
>>>
>>>                 Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2012 12:46 AM
>>>                 To: [email protected] WG
>>>                 Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Meeting slot for the Vancouver
>>> IETF meeting
>>>
>>>         requested
>>>
>>>                 Hi all,
>>>
>>>                 I have requested a 2,5 hour slot for the upcoming
>>> meeting.
>>>
>>>                 While the next meeting is still a bit away it is
>>> nevertheless
>>>
>>>     useful
>>>
>>>         to hear
>>>
>>>                 * whether you plan to attend the next meeting, and
>>>                 * whether you want to present something.
>>>
>>>                 I could imagine that these documents will be
>>> discussed:
>>>                 * draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg
>>>                 * draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token
>>>                 * draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer
>>>                 * draft-ietf-oauth-revocation
>>>                 * draft-ietf-oauth-use-cases
>>>
>>>                 To the draft authors of these docuemnts: Please
>>> think about the
>>>
>>>     open
>>>
>>>         issues and drop a mail to the list so that we make some
>>> progress
>>>         already before the face-to-face meeting.
>>>
>>>                 I am assume that the following documents do not
>>> require any
>>>
>>>         discussion time at the upcoming IETF meeting anymore:
>>>
>>>                 * draft-ietf-oauth-assertions
>>>                 * draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer
>>>                 * draft-ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns
>>>                 * draft-ietf-oauth-v2
>>>                 * draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer
>>>
>>>                 Ciao
>>>                 Hannes
>>>

-- 
       Derek Atkins                 617-623-3745
       [email protected]             www.ihtfp.com
       Computer and Internet Security Consultant
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Reply via email to