Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Split

Blaine Cook <romeda@gmail.com> Thu, 21 October 2010 06:25 UTC

Return-Path: <romeda@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C99D3A6954 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 23:25:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7iN4coFCKfam for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 23:25:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com (mail-ww0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 324D33A6873 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 23:25:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wwf26 with SMTP id 26so2155827wwf.13 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 23:26:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=EjO6OHcXP5FaEA4YRdilUExzTt0LLR/zfKkBA5SuUX8=; b=iNeQcXArxznliulWwkL7sc3I/x9gMUxQBdkkpnVlmUUAOuFIlgmI5BVyW6JRPMy/eQ omJwro0bE7SsdSnXl5EWh4rI5lx2jWkME4fcd7Ti5nr9BKYR75PKQA4Fioi+36YW1lc/ FGElY3GTvISllVXoSHOEsBJA/qubXRmTPBaWs=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=GFSKS1JhT+DeDlhMx8wfYJpmB8mWLZXzr0GL5RZXki1S8Wa2144vWf/CHY2t3b/SIM rwu70+xd7gOF1ujDV04WnPMOZnP68MMSDPkmXjnuiZ2FS0ayeZUvwXUFN4AC5h2eWQjl wP+5XwHHG5CxUD6DBTxJldALVFKQ94rnouP9M=
Received: by 10.216.138.65 with SMTP id z43mr520202wei.12.1287642400912; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 23:26:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.68.194 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 23:26:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343D46A5847D@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
References: <AANLkTik30oVX+AevGCZDHajjyrDnEVB=fp6rAdihkPFz@mail.gmail.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739431D4FCC3E@TK5EX14MBXC203.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <AANLkTikn2CQ7bBTMZf0YJ3WCcnWUjKMLYx=GNu9PaF86@mail.gmail.com> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343D46A5847D@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
From: Blaine Cook <romeda@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 23:26:20 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimoBk3YXX3tgPvudG76PiV-aVGhauiZRN=yqRRq@mail.gmail.com>
To: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Split
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 06:25:21 -0000

On that process note, does anyone OBJECT to splitting the draft as
described? The call closes in about an hour, depending on which time
zone you're in. If we don't hear objections by mid-day PST tomorrow
(the 21st), I think it's safe to say we have consensus on this issue.

b.

On 20 October 2010 22:56, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com> wrote:
> This is not a comment about Mike's generous offer.
>
> Choosing an editor is the sole discretion of the chairs. While the working group can offer the chairs feedback, it is best done directly because of the personal nature of selecting people. At the end, the chairs choose the person they want for the role. I just want to make sure people understand how this works, and to avoid debating roles in the same way we argue about technical details.
>
> EHL
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: oauth-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
>> Of Marius Scurtescu
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 11:55 AM
>> To: Mike Jones
>> Cc: oauth@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Split
>>
>> +1
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Mike Jones
>> <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> > I am willing to serve as editor for the bearer token specification and have
>> my management's approval to do so.  Furthermore, I believe that I am
>> qualified, having successfully served as an editor for several standards
>> specifications, including the OASIS IMI specification and related SAML token
>> profiles, the OpenID PAPE specification, and (some time ago), the POSIX
>> Threads standard.
>> >
>> >                                -- Mike
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: oauth-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
>> > Of Blaine Cook
>> > Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 5:32 PM
>> > To: oauth@ietf.org
>> > Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Split
>> >
>> > Over the past few weeks, the working group debated the issues around
>> the introduction of signatures and the structure of the specification.
>> > The working group seems to endorse the proposal to split the current
>> specification into two parts: one including section 5 (bearer token) and the
>> other including the rest (how to obtain a token), with an additional
>> specification covering signature use cases.
>> >
>> > This serves as a call for consensus on the proposed editorial work.
>> > Before we proceed with the changes, the chairs would like to ask if anyone
>> has any concerns or objections against this proposal.
>> >
>> > In addition, the chairs are seeking a volunteer to take over the bearer
>> token specification (section 5) as editor.
>> >
>> > Please submit your comments by Wednesday, October 20th.
>> >
>> > - The OAuth Working Group Chairs
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>