[OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Split
Blaine Cook <romeda@gmail.com> Thu, 14 October 2010 00:32 UTC
Return-Path: <romeda@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D87043A6A88 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:32:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oL3S7KvjNUxV for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:31:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A01B23A6A3C for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:31:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qwc9 with SMTP id 9so3512175qwc.31 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:32:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=7VR0ryMbhHO9kWC4qbAvnvN0lQ2dtQTUP3uRR3uYCvU=; b=DHQsGUkSX1FE0hIzV4MbB4oWsKk20qhC7EyMOqsGm3JFOnGVsgIo4hhO34ZqcjsJrh 8wyOxUORC/fd43/eOAn/PEgqNEr9JQrjl9683uWm6KclWjVgxeq7peowDw7tbDoxdH6L 59ydZw8iinzbhT+rUkxfqMRTou4+YJO7Ye+ss=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; b=liHF1HBVi7WgQU3AWiYJo/jha9DDXhX992Vbs7i/Yww9wGqJC2GbymiW7GnTgd/4lb bt+2ShKQ1eVI6cI6p/KnsjBoIRUw61AoZadfVAuafijS2fSOJwRQPh1WyuEva0I2TcK1 FhPxiTKG5FP1Bfhs4rSvP9B2GGG1keNRWXPWE=
Received: by 10.229.241.12 with SMTP id lc12mr8148216qcb.178.1287016360424; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:32:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.61.97 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:32:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Blaine Cook <romeda@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:32:20 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTik30oVX+AevGCZDHajjyrDnEVB=fp6rAdihkPFz@mail.gmail.com>
To: oauth@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Split
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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, 14 Oct 2010 00:32:10 -0000
Over the past few weeks, the working group debated the issues around the introduction of signatures and the structure of the specification. The working group seems to endorse the proposal to split the current specification into two parts: one including section 5 (bearer token) and the other including the rest (how to obtain a token), with an additional specification covering signature use cases. This serves as a call for consensus on the proposed editorial work. Before we proceed with the changes, the chairs would like to ask if anyone has any concerns or objections against this proposal. In addition, the chairs are seeking a volunteer to take over the bearer token specification (section 5) as editor. Please submit your comments by Wednesday, October 20th. - The OAuth Working Group Chairs
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Hannes Tschofenig
- [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Split Blaine Cook
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Mike Jones
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Manger, James H
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Manger, James H
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Brian Eaton
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Marius Scurtescu
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Blaine Cook
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Mike Jones
- [OAUTH-WG] So back to use cases? (was RE: Call fo… Freeman, Tim
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] So back to use cases? (was RE: Cal… William Mills
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] So back to use cases? (was RE: Cal… Zeltsan, Zachary (Zachary)
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] So back to use cases? (was RE: Cal… Skylar Woodward
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] So back to use cases? (was RE: Cal… George Fletcher
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] So back to use cases? (was RE: Cal… Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] So back to use cases? (was RE: Cal… Eve Maler
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] So back to use cases? (was RE: Cal… Zeltsan, Zachary (Zachary)
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Manger, James H
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Spl… Eran Hammer-Lahav