[OAUTH-WG] Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on draft-ietf-oauth-native-apps-11: (with COMMENT)

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-oauth-native-apps-11: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-native-apps/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

A couple of nits:

8.2.  OAuth Implicit Grant Authorization Flow

   The OAuth 2.0 implicit grant authorization flow as defined in
   Section 4.2 of OAuth 2.0 [RFC6749] generally works with the practice
   of performing the authorization request in the browser, and
receiving
   the authorization response via URI-based inter-app communication.
   However, as the Implicit Flow cannot be protected by PKCE (which is
a
   required in Section 8.1), the use of the Implicit Flow with native
   apps is NOT RECOMMENDED.

NOT RECOMMENDED is not actually a construct allowed by RFC 2119, I think
you should reword it using "SHOULD NOT".

It would be good to add RFC reference for HTTPS URIs.