[OAUTH-WG] Next steps on the OAuth Assertion Drafts

["Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi all, 

I am trying to wrap up the assertion documents and I took a look at the meeting minutes from the Berlin IETF meeting and the actions are as follows:

** John & Torsten: Please post your document review to the list.

** Authors of draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer: Please provide the additional SAML related text (as discussed during the meeting) and submit an updated document. 

Ciao
Hannes

------- copy from the minutes --------

* Assertions (BC)
 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-assertions/
 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer/
 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer/

    - WGLC ends by 8/8
    - BL on WGLC comments: talked to MJ about how to achieve interop.
    - BL: describe how you could combine specifications to make at least one interoperable specification
    - MJ: profiles exists for both SAML and OpenIDC. those are not IETF specifications though
    - BL: ok to point to external doc from either of the I-Ds in question
    - MJ: very achievable
    - BL: all should go to the IESG at the same time to establish context
    - PHO: is this for the IESG benefit or for future developers
    - BL: the latter
    - PHO: talk to Heather Flanagan or the IANA - they have talked about having long-term access to external documents
    - BL: ok will consider that - or we can copy text into WG wiki
    - BC: interop does not require external profiles actually
    - TL: same experience at DT with the JSON-based assertion format - no addl profiles are needed
    - MJ: a SAML deployment needs agreement on certain SAML-specific conventions - this is what BL is referring to
    - BC: right
    - TN: so just refer to the SAML specs
    - BL: maybe enough
    - JB and TL volunteered to make a review.