Return-Path: 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 10D3021F86BA; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 07:05:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 kfqjwCDmnfgI; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 07:05:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from treacle.ucs.ed.ac.uk (treacle.ucs.ed.ac.uk [129.215.16.102]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 059BD21F8551; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 07:05:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from nutty.inf.ed.ac.uk (nutty.inf.ed.ac.uk [129.215.33.33]) by treacle.ucs.ed.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.4) with ESMTP id q28F56Ie018790; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 15:05:06 GMT Received: from calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk (calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk [129.215.24.15]) by nutty.inf.ed.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q28F56vS021035; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 15:05:06 GMT Received: from calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q28F56Wh007733; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 15:05:06 GMT Received: (from ht@localhost) by calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id q28F55sD007728; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 15:05:05 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk: ht set sender to ht@inf.ed.ac.uk using -f To: Barry Leiba References: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723453AFCD4076@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> From: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson) Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:05:05 +0000 In-Reply-To: (Barry Leiba's message of "Thu, 8 Mar 2012 09:50:29 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) XEmacs/21.4.21 (linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Edinburgh-Scanned: at treacle.ucs.ed.ac.uk with MIMEDefang 2.60, Sophie, Sophos Anti-Virus, Clam AntiVirus X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.60 on 129.215.16.102 Cc: "dr@fb.com" , "oauth@ietf.org" , "apps-discuss@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] [apps-discuss] FW: Appsdir review of draft-ietf-oauth-v2-23 X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OAUTH WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:05:37 -0000 Barry Leiba writes: >> You have read the spec., and the _only_ concrete thing it tells you >> about the registers is the name of an email list.  So you have to go >> to the email archives and search for . . . what exactly?  Different in >> the three cases above, and in none of them is it obvious how to know >> what counts as success. > > The email list is just how you start the registration process. There > will be an IANA registry for access token types. When IANA creates > it, the name will be in the published RFC (I expect there'll be a > section in the IANA registries page ( http://www.iana.org/protocols/ ) > for "OAuth Parameters", and "Access Token Types" will be listed there; > search that page for "DKIM" to see what it'll look like). The spec > also says what will be *in* the registry. > > The RFC Editor specifically does NOT want the URL for the registry to > be in the RFC (the URL might change). But the registry NAME will be > there. OK, I now recognise a culture clash as the underlying point at issue, so this spec. is the wrong place to address it. Thanks for your patience, I hereby get out of the road on this point. I'll reply to Eran's message wrt any other outstanding points. . . ht -- Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]