Re: [OAUTH-WG] draft-ietf-oauth-spop naming

The OAuth meeting is today.

We ran into the publication deadline for the IETF meeting during IIW so haven't published a update yet.

We do have text on defining error codes that we will discuss today. 

I expect the name discussion will also happen today.    Changing the draft name is annoying for document tracker continuity but doable.

John B.

On Nov 12, 2014, at 6:56 AM, Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com> wrote:

> I agree that changing the name could avoid a lot of unnecessary confusion (and said as much in Sept 
> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg13361.html). 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Bill Mills <wmills_92105@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Any progress on naming on this thing?   Didn't see any reply to my previous comment, but that might have been because I replied to the -02 publication notice and it might have gotten filtered.
> 
> Similarly, the question of extending the error registry to allow the server tofeed back a failure if the server's required hash method isn't sent.  Also may need a way to advertise what hash method is required.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -bill
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth