Re: [OAUTH-WG] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9126 (7254)

Chris Smiley <csmiley@amsl.com> Mon, 21 November 2022 22:03 UTC

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Chris Smiley <csmiley@amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20221118182346.CAB7755F7E@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 14:02:58 -0800
Cc: joseph@heenan.me.uk, torsten@lodderstedt.net, bcampbell@pingidentity.com, nat@sakimura.org, dave@tonge.org, panva.ip@gmail.com, oauth@ietf.org, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1F60F4B8-08E6-4410-A1E4-9FFB3E8C7071@amsl.com>
References: <20221118182346.CAB7755F7E@rfcpa.amsl.com>
To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>, Paul Wouters <paul.wouters@aiven.io>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/kZrKDpJ4l3k-4U9GeB6vo9UyKu4>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9126 (7254)
Precedence: list

Greetings Area Directors,

We are unable to verify this erratum that the submitter marked as editorial.  
Please note that we have changed the “Type” of the following errata 
report to “Technical”.  As Stream Approver, please review and set the 
Status and Type accordingly (see the definitions at 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata-definitions/).

You may review the report at: 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7254

Please see https://www.rfc-editor.org/how-to-verify/ for further 
information on how to verify errata reports.

Further information on errata can be found at: 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.php.

Thank you.

RFC Editor/cs


> On Nov 18, 2022, at 10:23 AM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9126,
> "OAuth 2.0 Pushed Authorization Requests".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7254
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Joseph Heenan <joseph@heenan.me.uk>
> 
> Section: 1.1
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> POST /as/par HTTP/1.1
> Host: as.example.com
> Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
> 
> &response_type=code
> &client_id=CLIENT1234&state=duk681S8n00GsJpe7n9boxdzen
> <...>
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> POST /as/par HTTP/1.1
> Host: as.example.com
> Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
> 
> response_type=code
> &client_id=CLIENT1234&state=duk681S8n00GsJpe7n9boxdzen
> <...>
> 
> Notes
> -----
> In the 'Introductory Example', the POST body to the par endpoint contains an unnecessary '&' at the start. (It's perhaps technically valid, but could potentially confuse readers.)
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC9126 (draft-ietf-oauth-par-10)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : OAuth 2.0 Pushed Authorization Requests
> Publication Date    : September 2021
> Author(s)           : T. Lodderstedt, B. Campbell, N. Sakimura, D. Tonge, F. Skokan
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Web Authorization Protocol
> Area                : Security
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>

[OAUTH-WG] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9126 (7… RFC Errata System
Re: [OAUTH-WG] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC912… Chris Smiley