Re: [OAUTH-WG] Bearer token DISCUSS items related to errors
Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Thu, 10 May 2012 01:38 UTC
Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
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 D0C8D11E80ED for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 May 2012 18:38:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.56
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.56 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.039, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 PltgZ3WWVhd6 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 May 2012 18:38:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41D0F11E80E4 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 May 2012 18:38:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.9] (unknown [216.17.175.160]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3458940058; Wed, 9 May 2012 19:53:36 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <4FAB1C04.80101@stpeter.im>
Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 19:38:12 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eran Hammer <eran@hueniverse.com>
References: <0CBAEB56DDB3A140BA8E8C124C04ECA201026E40@P3PWEX2MB008.ex2.secureserver.net>
In-Reply-To: <0CBAEB56DDB3A140BA8E8C124C04ECA201026E40@P3PWEX2MB008.ex2.secureserver.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org WG (oauth@ietf.org)" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Bearer token DISCUSS items related to errors
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: Thu, 10 May 2012 01:38:15 -0000
On 5/9/12 6:17 PM, Eran Hammer wrote: > All Russ was asking for is an explanation. Instead, he was told there > was no good reason and that it should be changed. That was clearly not > an honest representation of clear working group consensus from over 10 > months ago which was achieved at great effort. Was it presented this way in the proto write-up or verbally on an IESG telechat or in some other way? Just curious to figure out where things went awry here... Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
- [OAUTH-WG] Bearer token DISCUSS items related to … Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Bearer token DISCUSS items related… Mike Jones
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Bearer token DISCUSS items related… Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Bearer token DISCUSS items related… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Bearer token DISCUSS items related… Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Bearer token DISCUSS items related… Eran Hammer