Re: [OAUTH-WG] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-27: (with COMMENT)

Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 23 April 2015 02:13 UTC

Return-Path: <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7148D1A0167; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 19:13:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FaddCqsgWnDi; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 19:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-x231.google.com (mail-lb0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18D0C1A0163; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 19:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lbbqq2 with SMTP id qq2so3012264lbb.3; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 19:13:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ycpUBpLkRTw80yFgvDnprbgP01UAtt1IbsrfjHX3MX0=; b=J/voN3Q4UYTunV5kAhWNRaSLOWjU4YGeIiAFVyKGXcuBUAH53Zz+LpR2BE/vOK0594 gYCzZj3l4f2hI+mbojbvPDIDL9XEqjsc/Q1Js8A0xSJrf2NqTRdHWVhPy0NQuQoncFNz xC+jN6Kcg0LCCz3JW2H6MUoHNIZTDT6cm060mXxXYrLkHX3EEraf6XhnXmVDwT778Pfk EbKZrWrwa+0/ivZIu3tKVFmv/TIvpZCGPGJtCZZp29/KrJw8Qs7VFTwyIbox7HQRDQWQ MEE8bJrnEnJMlKJfJC4ajVcrMmK0o6xpWJ3XUgt66DMryhqS/I4MOaklhwhu9K3nJJiy nrRA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.204.40 with SMTP id kv8mr402492lac.113.1429755187658; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 19:13:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.11.199 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 19:13:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BL2PR03MB43373CFD4F80AF2C98D9A0BF5EE0@BL2PR03MB433.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20150406214830.8764.52235.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <B52367E6-370F-4681-B4F5-F06C90F86959@yahoo.com> <89B75F57-55D8-4137-9F1C-9BD7C71AC855@nostrum.com> <BY2PR03MB4429FC8FABE03426B27663EF5FD0@BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <7CD93E42-BDD7-456F-8445-AE233A2897B7@mit.edu> <82268A04-588C-4D43-A638-8D99E76727DD@mit.edu> <CBC65420-441F-4073-84E0-6EDB7E06F54E@nostrum.com> <BL2PR03MB43373CFD4F80AF2C98D9A0BF5EE0@BL2PR03MB433.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 22:13:07 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHbuEH6nq8nEQFtHAMi07RpY28JPMdfnvUqzNq6_wPuZKZXv8w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
To: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11347da613830d05145ad289
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/CXHzj762PgMOaJVFK5h9lk8OKW4>
Cc: "draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg@ietf.org>, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, Phil Hunt <phil.hunt@yahoo.com>, "<oauth@ietf.org>" <oauth@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "oauth-chairs@ietf.org" <oauth-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-27: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 02:13:11 -0000

Thanks, guys.  Let me know when tis has been addressed.

Kathleen

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 7:35 PM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
wrote:

> I'd be fine adding the BCP 100 reference.  I'd rather that we keep the
> early registration procedures language.
>
>                                 -- Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Campbell [mailto:ben@nostrum.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 2:31 PM
> To: Justin Richer
> Cc: draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg@ietf.org; Phil Hunt; <oauth@ietf.org>rg>; Mike
> Jones; The IESG; oauth-chairs@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Ben Campbell's No Objection on
> draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-27: (with COMMENT)
>
> On 21 Apr 2015, at 20:30, Justin Richer wrote:
>
> > Ben et. al,
> >
> > We’ve incorporated feedback into the latest draft:
> >
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-28
> > <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-28>
> >>
>
> I think that resolves all my comments save one:
>
> [...]
>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> 4.1 and 4.2 allow the designated expert to accept preliminary
> >>> registrations if they are confident a spec will be published.
> >>> Shouldn't
> >>> this follow the normal processes for preliminary registrations? Is
> >>> there
> >>> a way to walk back registrations if the spec isn't published after
> >>> all?
> >>
> >> I’ll defer to others’ expertise on the right text for the IANA
> >> section, this was imported from another example spec.
> >>
>
> BCP 100 (RFC 7120) describes the IANA early allocation procedures. You
> might consider a reference to that, so you can capture the processes for
> walking back allocations that don't get finalized. Or, unless you want
> additional restrictions not in the BCP, you could leave out mention of
> early allocations completely, and let IANA deal with it according to
> standard procedures.
>
>
> [...]
>
>


-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen