As an editorial note, the text referenced (section 5.2.4) by Joseph, "If
FIDO2/WebAuthn support is not available, Channel Initiated Backchannel
Authentication (CIBA) provides an alternative.." should reference "Client
Initiated Backchannel Authentication (CIBA)". This reference is correct in
the
Dear Rifaat,
I respect your decision and wish all the best to the authors and members
going forward.
I would also like to bring to your kind attention that the discussions on
Item No 5 which suggested inclusion of client app parameters in the signal
flow could not be even started. I quote one of
Hi all,
I've been posting periodically about an initiative that we hope to discuss
during the IETF 115 sessions, which we are now calling Fine-grained
Transactional Authorization (FTA). As a group of about 10-15 people, we
have met a few times online, and arrived at this charter document for the
Jaimandeep,
With the chair hat on, and as the shepherd for this document, I think that
the authors addressed your comments in detail, and Warren provided you with
some valuable responses. I do not see a need for any further discussion at
this stage.
The next step is the shepherd review, which
Hi, thanks so much. Will take my time amending this with some help.
Smart E11
On Thu, 27 Oct 2022, 02:16 Daniel Fett,
wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> thanks for bringing this to our attention! I think the recommendations in
> the PR are very helpful and we will consider adding the text to the
>
Thanks Joseph, those are good additions, thanks for pointing them out. I have
opened issues to track both of them.
-Original Message-
From: Joseph Heenan
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2022 11:49 AM
To: Pieter Kasselman
Cc: oauth@ietf.org; Daniel Fett ; Filip Skokan
Subject: Re:
Hi Christian,
thanks for bringing this to our attention! I think the recommendations
in the PR are very helpful and we will consider adding the text to the
document.
-Daniel
Am 25.10.22 um 15:37 schrieb Christian Mainka:
Hi,
we would like to request the inclusion of _in-browser
