Agreed, I'm guessing it was a clerical error with the IETF tools. -- Justin
On Aug 26, 2014, at 4:01 PM, Mike Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm confused too. There hadn't been any discussion of any of the new > documents going to last call that I can remember, either in Toronto, or on > the list. > > -----Original Message----- > From: OAuth [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Bradley > Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 12:47 PM > To: Phil Hunt > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Last Call on "Symmetric Proof of > Possession for the OAuth Authorization Code Grant" > > Yes, I haden't anticipated going to last call right after being adopted as a > WG document. > > Is this some procedural thing that I am unaware of? > > John B. > > On Aug 26, 2014, at 3:39 PM, Phil Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I am confused. We hummed to adopt the document not to go to last call. >> >> Phil >> >> @independentid >> www.independentid.com >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> On Aug 26, 2014, at 12:32 PM, Hannes Tschofenig <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> This is a Last Call for comments on the "Symmetric Proof of >>> Possession for the OAuth Authorization Code Grant" specification. >>> >>> The document can be found here: >>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-spop/ >>> >>> Please have your comments in no later than September 9th. >>> >>> Ciao >>> Hannes & Derek >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OAuth mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OAuth mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth > > _______________________________________________ > OAuth mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
