Re: [OAUTH-WG] Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on draft-ietf-oauth-native-apps-11: (with COMMENT)

As far as I can tell, 'NOT RECOMMENDED' is fine per RFC 2119.

from https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt

4. SHOULD NOT   This phrase, *or the phrase "NOT RECOMMENDED"* mean that
   there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances when the
   particular behavior is acceptable or even useful, but the full
   implications should be understood and the case carefully weighed
   before implementing any behavior described with this label.

And also this errata notes that NOT RECOMMENDED should be in the first
part of the abstract
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=2119&eid=499

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
wrote:

> Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-oauth-native-apps-11: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-native-apps/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> A couple of nits:
>
> 8.2.  OAuth Implicit Grant Authorization Flow
>
>    The OAuth 2.0 implicit grant authorization flow as defined in
>    Section 4.2 of OAuth 2.0 [RFC6749] generally works with the practice
>    of performing the authorization request in the browser, and
> receiving
>    the authorization response via URI-based inter-app communication.
>    However, as the Implicit Flow cannot be protected by PKCE (which is
> a
>    required in Section 8.1), the use of the Implicit Flow with native
>    apps is NOT RECOMMENDED.
>
> NOT RECOMMENDED is not actually a construct allowed by RFC 2119, I think
> you should reword it using "SHOULD NOT".
>
> It would be good to add RFC reference for HTTPS URIs.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>