Re: [OAUTH-WG] [apps-discuss] R: draft-jones-appsawg-webfinger-04

"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> Mon, 07 May 2012 13:17 UTC

Return-Path: <paulej@packetizer.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 1B70E21F85BD; Mon, 7 May 2012 06:17:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.529
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.529 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.069, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 zwV7R2QK6nE6; Mon, 7 May 2012 06:17:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4256A21F85B7; Mon, 7 May 2012 06:17:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [156.106.244.92] ([156.106.244.92]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q47DGXam007831 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 7 May 2012 09:16:34 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1336396595; bh=Dpf2khUBG8MtxU9NenIHHSD8szNTUOiKpGpy7ugK+pw=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=YYcC/pxhW9+W5TcY35jfMpRsqyciejQRCh85ZAHuZ/ZFB39idNwiyM+8lgd8Yl28P Cd5dAZtS9unS/Hqv5wkuc2CNJPgEEPBi0mFPfnO7epbsVEkyLTbVc+fR5VAAxURfP/ lbpl18EGHi6y6ETWoWq85XJGuElsJNpNpoMLRqYA=
Message-ID: <4FA7CB3A.4020000@packetizer.com>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 09:16:42 -0400
From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Goix Laurent Walter <laurentwalter.goix@telecomitalia.it>
References: <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E00392810E4CA@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com> <5876011F-2C2C-4889-9452-E8BDC1438713@cisco.com> <A09A9E0A4B9C654E8672D1DC003633AE52EE435611@GRFMBX704BA020.griffon.local>
In-Reply-To: <A09A9E0A4B9C654E8672D1DC003633AE52EE435611@GRFMBX704BA020.griffon.local>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050404080207070600040108"
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>, "Gonzalo Salgueiro \(gsalguei\)" <gsalguei@cisco.com>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] [apps-discuss] R: draft-jones-appsawg-webfinger-04
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, 07 May 2012 13:17:01 -0000

Walter,

I'm not sure what the full set of issues will be, but I only have a 
couple of small edits queued for -05 at present (one being "template" 
should be "href" in the example at the end of 4.2 that you pointed out 
to me privately).  We've already worked through a number of issues to 
get to this point, so there may not be a lot of changes needed.  I'll 
not dismiss the possibility that there are editorial issues, but I hope 
we've resolved most of the technical details.

We probably still need to have the discussion of keeping CORS and what 
additions are needed to the security section.  We've made a few changes 
there already, but I'm not sure if it still fully addresses some of the 
privacy concerns.

Paul

On 5/7/2012 5:37 AM, Goix Laurent Walter wrote:
>
> I also support this draft as a way forward for the discussion that I 
> think captures the essence of both philosophies.
>
> If such basis is agreed what are the major pending issues?
>
> Regards
>
> Laurent-walter
>
> *Da:*apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org 
> [mailto:apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] *Per conto di *Gonzalo 
> Salgueiro (gsalguei)
> *Inviato:* venerdì 4 maggio 2012 21.50
> *A:* Murray S. Kucherawy
> *Cc:* oauth@ietf.org; apps-discuss@ietf.org
> *Oggetto:* Re: [apps-discuss] draft-jones-appsawg-webfinger-04
>
> I support this doc being adopted as starting point for WG discussion.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gonzalo
>
>
> On May 4, 2012, at 3:03 PM, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com 
> <mailto:msk@cloudmark.com>> wrote:
>
>     The above-named draft has been offered as the recommended path
>     forward in terms of converging on a single document to advance
>     through appsawg.  The conversation I saw this week in that regard
>     has seemed mostly positive.
>
>     Please review it, or at least the diff, and indicate your support
>     or objection on apps-discuss@ietf.org
>     <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org> to adopting this one as the common
>     path forward. We would like to make a decision about which one to
>     begin advancing in the next week or two.
>
>     Have a good weekend!
>
>     -MSK, APPSAWG co-chair
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     apps-discuss mailing list
>     apps-discuss@ietf.org <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>