Return-Path: 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 85ED521F86FD for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 12:28:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.807 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.807 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.209, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] 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 QnBRw59bdsWY for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 12:28:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from am1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (am1ehsobe006.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.209]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A8F921F86FA for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 12:28:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail112-am1-R.bigfish.com (10.3.201.227) by AM1EHSOBE004.bigfish.com (10.3.204.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.23; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:28:13 +0000 Received: from mail112-am1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail112-am1-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80E111C00C4; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:28:13 +0000 (UTC) X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.8; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:TK5EX14HUBC104.redmond.corp.microsoft.com; RD:none; EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: -22 X-BigFish: VS-22(zz9371Ic85fh4015Izz1202hzz1033IL8275bh8275dhz2fh2a8h668h839hd25hf0ah107ah1155h) Received-SPF: pass (mail112-am1: domain of microsoft.com designates 131.107.125.8 as permitted sender) client-ip=131.107.125.8; envelope-from=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; helo=TK5EX14HUBC104.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ; icrosoft.com ; Received: from mail112-am1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail112-am1 (MessageSwitch) id 1344972492257538_18676; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:28:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from AM1EHSMHS013.bigfish.com (unknown [10.3.201.229]) by mail112-am1.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D999A0046; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:28:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TK5EX14HUBC104.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (131.107.125.8) by AM1EHSMHS013.bigfish.com (10.3.207.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.23; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:28:11 +0000 Received: from TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.2.132]) by TK5EX14HUBC104.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.80.25]) with mapi id 14.02.0309.003; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:28:08 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: William Mills , O Auth WG Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 1.0a Thread-Index: AQHNelIeRIYAXXdX2U+xkUXfulfBLJdZsS0g Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:28:07 +0000 Message-ID: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394366777A7F@TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> References: <1344972117.60342.YahooMailNeo@web31802.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1344972117.60342.YahooMailNeo@web31802.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.79] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394366777A7FTK5EX14MBXC283r_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 1.0a X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OAUTH WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:28:15 -0000 --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394366777A7FTK5EX14MBXC283r_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable What problem are you trying to solve? From: oauth-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of W= illiam Mills Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 12:22 PM To: O Auth WG Subject: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 1.0a What's the general opinion on 1.0a? Am I stepping in something if I refer = to it in another draft? I want to reference an auth scheme that uses signi= ng and now MAC is apparently going back to the drawing board, so I'm thinki= ng about using 1.0a. Thanks, -bill --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394366777A7FTK5EX14MBXC283r_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

What problem are you tryi= ng to solve?

 <= /p>

From: oauth-bo= unces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of William Mills
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 12:22 PM
To: O Auth WG
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 1.0a

 

What's the general opinion on 1.0a?  Am I stepping in something if = I refer to it in another draft?  I want to reference an auth scheme th= at uses signing and now MAC is apparently going back to the drawing board, so I'm thinking about using 1.0a.

 

Thanks,

 

-bill

--_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394366777A7FTK5EX14MBXC283r_--