IMHO that’s a reasonable and pragmatic option.
Thanks
———
Dominick
On 11. February 2019 at 13:26:37, Brian Campbell (bcampb...@pingidentity.com)
wrote:
It's been pointed out that the potential issue is not isolated to the just
token endpoint but that revocation, introspection, etc. could be impa
Hi all,
Since neither Rifaat nor I are available for the "OAuth WG Virtual Office
Hours" we unfortunately have to cancel the call.
Ciao
Hannes & Rifaat
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended reci
All,
Unfortunately, Hannes and I cannot attend this meeting today, so we are
canceling the meeting for this week.
Regards,
Rifaat
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 10:19 AM Hannes Tschofenig <
hannes.tschofe...@arm.com> wrote:
> Rifaat noticed that the distributed Outlook calendar invite was incorrect.
Right, I was just trying to recount what had happened and say that it was
my understanding that the URI registrations were the ones you'd expressed
concern with and moved to early registration while the topic of this thread
was about parameter names. I guess it doesn't really matter but it seemed
l
It's been pointed out that the potential issue is not isolated to the just
token endpoint but that revocation, introspection, etc. could be impacted
as well. So, at this point, the proposal on the table is to add a new
optional AS metadata parameter named 'mtls_endpoints' that's value we be a
JSON
