[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer-18.txt

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on 
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at 
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments 
you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer-18.txt
Reviewer: Alexey Melnikov
Review Date: 10 April 2012
IETF LC End Date: 7 Feb 2012
IESG Telechat date: 12 April 2012

Summary: Nearly ready to be published as Proposed Standard, with a 
couple of things that should be addressed or at least discussed.

Thank you for addressing most of my other issues. However there are a 
couple remaining which I think are important.

Major Issues:

1).
    The "scope" attribute is a space-delimited list of scope values
    indicating the required scope of the access token for accessing the
    requested resource.  In some cases, the "scope" value will be used
    when requesting a new access token with sufficient scope of access to
    utilize the protected resource.  The "scope" attribute MUST NOT
    appear more than once.  The "scope" value is intended for
    programmatic use and is not meant to be displayed to end users.

I don't think this provide enough information about what this is, how it 
is to be used and which values are allowed. As this is not meant to be 
displayed to end users, then you need to say what values are allowed and 
which entity can allocate them. Is there a registry for these tokens, 
e.g. an IANA registry?

The editor provided explanation in email, however this was not reflected 
in any version of the draft.

2). Section "3.1.  Error Codes"

I've suggested to use an IANA registry for this field. Apparently there 
is already a registry created by 
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-v2-23#section-11.4>. 
However this document doesn't register values defined in section 3.1 
with IANA and doesn't point to draft-ietf-oauth-v2-23 for the registry. 
I find this to be very confusing.

Minor issues: none

Nits: none