Hi, Thanks for the comments. Responses inline w/ [DC]
On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 7:52 AM Mohamed Boucadair via Datatracker < [email protected]> wrote: > Mohamed Boucadair has entered the following ballot position for > charter-ietf-oauth-05-04: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-oauth/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Hi all, > > Thank you for preparing this updated version of the charter. > > Please find below some few comments: > > # Agents > > CURRENT: > As automated agents increasingly act on behalf of users, organizations, > or > both, these delegation patterns become increasingly involved and complex. > > ## Does the WG intend to work on identifying specifics of such schemes? > [DC] yes > > ## Does the WG intend to publish applicability documents to show how > existing > OAuth Framework can be used in such contexts? > [DC] that will be considered. > > ## The excerpt above exacerbates the need for having OAuth troubleshooting > mechanisms and good error reporting. I suggest to add an item for > operations/deployment considerations (and troubleshooting, in particular) > under > work program. > [DC] if there is interest in the working group, it will be addressed. > > # Restriction? > > CURRENT: > The working group is now tackling these topics which will be published as > Standards Track or BCPs: > > This statement would exclude that the WG can refresh work such as > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/inline-errata/rfc6819.html (that would, > for > example, integrate existing errata or considerations that may be specific > to > the complex delegation patterns listed above). I would argue for some > flexibility here. > [DC] This is a fair point. I'll be asking for suggestions to this issue on the telechat. Maybe adding the word 'primarily' before published... > > Cheers, > Med > > > >
_______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
