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

Mike Jones <> Thu, 14 October 2010 07:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FD553A6822 for <>; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.357
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.357 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.242, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Gk2KPZfGDBfu for <>; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:05:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 887D53A6868 for <>; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:05:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:06:40 -0700
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.01.0218.012; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:06:40 -0700
From: Mike Jones <>
To: Blaine Cook <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Split
Thread-Index: AQHLazd3pTJ/WW6MjUa2saVGmJKCG5NABU8g
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 07:06:39 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Call for Consensus on Document Split
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 07:05:23 -0000

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: [] On Behalf Of Blaine Cook
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 5:32 PM
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