Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration

Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com> Mon, 16 April 2012 19:16 UTC

Return-Path: <derek@ihtfp.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B6AE11E80DE for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Apr 2012 12:16:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.949
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.039, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Mt2-0fdGbKAi for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Apr 2012 12:16:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.ihtfp.org (MAIL2.IHTFP.ORG [204.107.200.7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D778C11E80D3 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Apr 2012 12:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ihtfp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B7A92602A6; Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:16:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mail2.ihtfp.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail2.ihtfp.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 16667-02; Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:16:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mocana.ihtfp.org (IHTFP-DHCP-158.IHTFP.ORG [192.168.248.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "cliodev.ihtfp.com", Issuer "IHTFP Consulting Certification Authority" (not verified)) by mail2.ihtfp.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1107260299; Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:16:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from warlord@localhost) by mocana.ihtfp.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q3GJGcJ4012769; Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:16:38 -0400
From: Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>
To: Eran Hammer <eran@hueniverse.com>
References: <5F51A14F-D548-4D29-B20F-5C3DCB3CB705@gmx.net> <0CBAEB56DDB3A140BA8E8C124C04ECA2FE7F47@P3PWEX2MB008.ex2.secureserver.net> <6760C38E-7C0C-412F-A285-8F4CB2858F30@gmx.net> <0CBAEB56DDB3A140BA8E8C124C04ECA2FE92E4@P3PWEX2MB008.ex2.secureserver.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:16:37 -0400
In-Reply-To: <0CBAEB56DDB3A140BA8E8C124C04ECA2FE92E4@P3PWEX2MB008.ex2.secureserver.net> (Eran Hammer's message of "Sun, 15 Apr 2012 20:36:01 +0000")
Message-ID: <sjmwr5f1o8a.fsf@mocana.ihtfp.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.2a
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org WG" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Client Registration
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 19:16:55 -0000

Eran Hammer <eran@hueniverse.com> writes:

> All I was saying is that it would be better to postpone it until the
> discovery layer, which this draft clearly relies upon, is a bit
> clearer. I would be satisfied with a simple note stating that if the
> discovery work at the APP area isn't complete, the WG may choose to
> delay work on this document until ready.

I don't feel that this is explicitly required, but I have no objection
to making it clearer in the charter that the DCR is dependent on
Discovery.  Hannes?

> EH

-derek

-- 
       Derek Atkins                 617-623-3745
       derek@ihtfp.com             www.ihtfp.com
       Computer and Internet Security Consultant