Re: [OAUTH-WG] Minor questions regarding draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-19

[Mike Jones <[e-mail]>]

For what it's worth, the JOSE documents such as http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature-25 also include the ECMAScript reference for the same reason as JWT does and Karen's shepherd write-up at http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature/shepherdwriteup/ doesn't list it as a down-reference.  I think that it shouldn't be list as a downref for JWT, because it's a reference to a related standard - not a reference to a standard that was obsoleted by any RFC, including not being obsoleted by RFC 7159.

				-- Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 1:57 AM
To: Mike Jones; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Minor questions regarding draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-19

Thanks, Mike.

Leave the ECMAScript reference in the document. I indicated it as a DOWNREF in the my shepherd write-up and that should be fine.

Ciao
Hannes


On 04/23/2014 06:32 PM, Mike Jones wrote:
> Replies inline...
> 
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: OAuth [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Hannes 
> Tschofenig
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 4:49 AM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Minor questions regarding
> draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-19
> 
>  
> 
> Doing my shepherd write-up I had a few minor questions:
> 
>  
> 
> * Could you move the RFC 6755 reference to the normative reference 
> section? Reason: the IANA consideration section depends on the 
> existence of the urn:ietf:params:oauth registry.
> 
>  
> 
> OK
> 
>  
> 
> * Could you move the JWK reference to the informative reference section?
> 
> Reason: The JWK is only used in an example and not essential to the 
> implementation or understanding of the specification.
> 
>  
> 
> OK
> 
>  
> 
> * Would it be sufficient to reference RFC 7159 instead of the 
> [ECMAScript] reference?
> 
>  
> 
> No.  There's no equivalent to Section 15.12 of ECMAScript about the 
> lexically last member name to reference in RFC 7159.  See the usage in 
> the first paragraph of 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-19#section-4.
> 
>  
> 
> * The document registers 'urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type' and it is 
> used in the "type" header parameter.
> 
>  
> 
> The text, however, states that the value can also be set to jwt. Why 
> would someone prefer to use urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type instead 
> of the much shorter jwt value?
> 
>  
> 
> There are use cases, such as using JWTs as tokens in WS-Trust, where a 
> URI is needed.
> 
>  
> 
> Ciao
> 
> Hannes
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks for doing this.
> 
>  
> 
>                                                             -- Mike
> 
>  
>