I went ahead and published a -12
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/c27amXSFGd8rHXy2NparrvRCpao/
On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 9:38 PM Andrii Deinega
wrote:
> Thank you. In addition to these ones, I believe -12 will also include
> some clarifications in the Token Introspection section.
>
> On
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Web Authorization Protocol WG of the IETF.
Title : OAuth 2.0 Rich Authorization Requests
Authors : Torsten Lodderstedt
Just
Reviewer: Gonzalo Salgueiro
Review result: Ready
I am the assigned ART directorate reviewer for this document. These comments
were written primarily for the benefit of the ART area directors. Document
editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call
comments.
This i
Thank you. In addition to these ones, I believe -12 will also include
some clarifications in the Token Introspection section.
On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 7:27 AM Brian Campbell
wrote:
>
> Perhaps we should do a -12 with those changes, which are already in the
> editors' draft in github, so that IESG
Dear Hannes (cc: oauth WG),
As the designated expert for the OAuth URI registry, can you review the
proposed registration in draft-ietf-oauth-jwk-thumbprint-uri for us? Please see
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-jwk-thumbprint-uri
If this is OK, when the IESG approves the document f
Perhaps we should do a -12 with those changes, which are already in the
editors' draft in github, so that IESG and other reviews aren't duplicating
efforts or findings?
On Thu, May 5, 2022, 8:54 AM Hannes Tschofenig
wrote:
> Hi Andreii,
>
> Thanks for pointing this out. We will incorporate your
