Re: [OAUTH-WG] Status of RFC 7009

"Richer, Justin P." <jricher@mitre.org> Tue, 16 December 2014 22:08 UTC

Return-Path: <jricher@mitre.org>
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 259631A87CE for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 14:08:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.509
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.509 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 fy9kItNrGq5P for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 14:08:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpvbsrv1.mitre.org (smtpvbsrv1.mitre.org [198.49.146.234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 974F91A8858 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 14:08:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpvbsrv1.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 0E73A72E035; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:08:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: from IMCCAS01.MITRE.ORG (imccas01.mitre.org [129.83.29.78]) by smtpvbsrv1.mitre.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3D82B2E004; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:08:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from IMCMBX01.MITRE.ORG ([169.254.1.102]) by IMCCAS01.MITRE.ORG ([129.83.29.68]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:08:03 -0500
From: "Richer, Justin P." <jricher@mitre.org>
To: Donald Coffin <donald.coffin@reminetworks.com>
Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] Status of RFC 7009
Thread-Index: AdAZd9rw5kb790tjSYWL2PaXemelPAALs78A
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 22:08:02 +0000
Message-ID: <6D868812-F2DC-488C-B740-C2B8DC80783F@mitre.org>
References: <002001d01978$2dbc9d10$8935d730$@reminetworks.com>
In-Reply-To: <002001d01978$2dbc9d10$8935d730$@reminetworks.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.146.15.76]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_6D868812F2DC488CB740C2B8DC80783Fmitreorg_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/bk0uS4K8BS8pVfvLoKnQiPJHI0E
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Status of RFC 7009
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: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 22:08:11 -0000

If you'll notice, RFC6749 is also Proposed Standard, as are most of the RFCs published out of IETF working groups. This is actually the final state for many protocols, and it's not until many years of wide deployment that things move up the classification stack.

So in short, yes, it's a standard.

 -- Justin

On Dec 16, 2014, at 4:35 PM, Donald Coffin <donald.coffin@reminetworks.com<mailto:donald.coffin@reminetworks.com>> wrote:

What is the official status of RFC 7009 Oauth 2.0 Token Revocation?

Is it still a proposed standard or has it been accepted as an internet standard.  The document implies it became a standard in August 2013, but several sites, including the ISOC, list it as a proposed standard.

Best regards,
Don
Donald F. Coffin
Founder/CTO

REMI Networks
2335 Dunwoody Crossing Suite E
Dunwoody, GA 30338

Phone:      (949) 636-8571
Email:       donald.coffin@reminetworks.com<mailto:donald.coffin@reminetworks.com>

_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org<mailto:OAuth@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth