Re: [OAUTH-WG] [apps-discuss] FW: Appsdir review of draft-ietf-oauth-v2-23

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Thu, 08 March 2012 14:50 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com>
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 216D521F86B2; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 06:50:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.985
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.985 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.008, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 wneCz8ooeztv; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 06:50:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yw0-f44.google.com (mail-yw0-f44.google.com [209.85.213.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4130D21F867E; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 06:50:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by yhpp34 with SMTP id p34so266218yhp.31 for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 06:50:30 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=znLGOONItsG7O0DL5MS8JS30AYedN96VpLxeVLeciGI=; b=KyUWpaWHLFprwDGeQx+bVfkoKojD7tuF/eixcT1SJDHKGoivXKUDEyH9Cj6YUAmBr6 q7VVUiFQaeUN9K1rJY2hkN/+LjKBaSkywDFk62K2VnpPZBmzjXo0Gfxv6sYx4Z3+nEIe ka5k8u1IKgyRnpIboSz1d4hp0yXwr1E7GlRpY+8KBNvLTVDh0f0Ro2iW5wvQC/eO7LZl MHfyVdZfQkHoIGGQZ0638yLja1L8qIpMhiRRv2rT0uc4DOJlXvxdbEqDD5qeKxctu9v0 LM3d15jfGx8PEiAJ+ZOGhsZc/WAhe1a/mHAZqBgsIf906/QcpX3ukXl21PFKBlaysfRF c5dw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.236.186.1 with SMTP id v1mr11401653yhm.4.1331218230000; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 06:50:30 -0800 (PST)
Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com
Received: by 10.147.106.16 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 06:50:29 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <f5br4x35nbs.fsf@calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk>
References: <f5bd39hbayn.fsf@calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723453AFCD4076@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <CAC4RtVCnhNqJoaD5BDhamqjaAeHXYmU_gnJ0wn4ay9bVvaPb8A@mail.gmail.com> <f5br4x35nbs.fsf@calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 09:50:29 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: x1Ovk_RoB4LPHAPq1kor495P6no
Message-ID: <CAC4RtVCh6jBOAoY1RhjMByYnQKipEtVT0TXfFoJsobjTp5+aNQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "dr@fb.com" <dr@fb.com>, "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>, "apps-discuss@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 <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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, 08 Mar 2012 14:50:39 -0000

> 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.

Barry