Re: [OAUTH-WG] Agenda Proposal

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

+1.

Discussion on the apps-discuss list would be welcome:

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss

On 3/17/11 4:57 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
> This proposal goes far beyond just solving any discovery needs for
> OAuth. It also directly competes with existing (deployed) proposals.
> This group is not the right forum to discuss and design a generally
> applicable discovery solution for the web. Once discovery is added to
> our charter (any discovery is currently out of scope), we can figure
> out if there are existing solutions to utilize, if we want to create
> a specialized solution for OAuth, or if a general purpose solution is
> needed (and does not already exist in a published standard).
> 
> If a general purpose solution is the direction to go, this is not the
> venue to develop it.
> 
> So again, presenting this at the meeting is fine, but beyond that,
> this working group is not chartered nor equipped to develop this
> technology for general purpose. In addition, the right way to present
> SWD to this WG is via an example of how OAuth might be using it, and
> not any direct discussion of the merits of the actual proposal - that
> belongs on the Apps-discuss list until another forum is identified or
> created.
> 
> EHL
> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: Anthony Nadalin
>> [mailto:[e-mail]] Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 3:41
>> PM To: Eran Hammer-Lahav; Hannes Tschofenig; [e-mail] 
>> Subject: RE: [OAUTH-WG] Agenda Proposal
>> 
>> I think it does for example how one might discover the
>> authorization service and this would be a forum to see if others
>> also do or not.
>> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: Eran Hammer-Lahav
>> [mailto:[e-mail]] Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 11:56
>> AM To: Anthony Nadalin; Hannes Tschofenig; [e-mail] Subject:
>> RE: [OAUTH-WG] Agenda Proposal
>> 
>> Re: draft-jones-simple-web-discovery
>> 
>> While I don't have an objections to this document being presented
>> and discussed at the meeting, I want to point that this has
>> absolutely nothing to do with this working group and if the IETF
>> community has an interest in pursuing it, it does not belong in
>> this working group.
>> 
>> EHL
>> 
>>> -----Original Message----- From: [e-mail]
>>> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Anthony Nadalin 
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 11:54 AM To: Hannes Tschofenig;
>>> [e-mail] Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Agenda Proposal
>>> 
>>> Is it possible to add these to the mix?
>>> 
>>> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-jones-simple-web-discovery-00.txt
>>> 
>>> and also the 
>>> http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-jones-oauth-jwt-bearer- 
>>> 00.txt
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message----- From: [e-mail]
>>> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Hannes Tschofenig 
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 11:29 AM To: [e-mail] 
>>> Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Agenda Proposal
>>> 
>>> Open Authentication Protocol WG ==============================-
>>> 
>>> FRIDAY, April 1, 2011 Vienna/Madrid Room
>>> 
>>> Chairs: Hannes Tschofenig/Blaine Cook
>>> 
>>> Agenda ------
>>> 
>>> 1) Agenda Bashing (Chairs)
>>> 
>>> 2) Discussion of Working Group Last Call Comments (Chairs/Mike
>>> Jones) http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-v2/ 
>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer/ 
>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer/
>>> 
>>> 3) OAuth Security (Thorsten) 
>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lodderstedt-oauth-security/
>>>
>>>
>>> 
4) OAuth JSON Encoding (Mike Jones)
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-json-web-token-01
>>> 
>>> 5) OAuth Use Cases (Zachary Zeltsan) 
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zeltsan-oauth-use-cases/
>>> 
>>> 6) Re-Chartering Discussion (Chairs)
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing
>>> list [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>> 
>>> 
>>>