Re: [Ace] Secdir telechat review of draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-41

Benjamin Kaduk <> Sun, 30 May 2021 23:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C45393A1A02; Sun, 30 May 2021 16:55:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HpwXhvF5Maqp; Sun, 30 May 2021 16:55:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A8623A1A01; Sun, 30 May 2021 16:55:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 14UNsxJT013239 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 30 May 2021 19:55:03 -0400
Date: Sun, 30 May 2021 16:54:58 -0700
From: Benjamin Kaduk <>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <>
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Ace] Secdir telechat review of draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-41
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 May 2021 23:55:09 -0000

Thanks, Phill.

I really appreciate having another set of eyes go over the changes in the
draft and cross-referencing against the review comments -- it makes me a
lot more confident that we're in good shape now.


On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 04:41:19PM -0700, Phillip Hallam-Baker via Datatracker wrote:
> Reviewer: Phillip Hallam-Baker
> Review result: Ready
> This draft was previously reviewed by Steve Kent for the -27 version. My review
> therefore mostly consists of checking that the changes recommended have been
> made and that no new issues have arisen. Note that contrary to the data in the
> tracker, I was not given the assignment in 2019.
> If you decide that you want to use OAUTH for authorization security for
> Internet of Things, this is a reasonable approach to take. This is not a simple
> proposition or for the fainthearted. OAuth is built around the various
> constraints of the browser world to which the constraints of being a
> constrained device are added.
> The issues raised by Steve have all been addressed as far as I can see. It
> looks good to go but since it is a security spec, ADs should still take note.