I think that is reasonable not to have a session at the IETF108. Following the discussion during IETF 107, we discussed the use of OAUTH to enhance automation and send a request to the OAUTH WG [1]. From the responses, we should be able to provide what I think a final version for next IETF - which does not represent a major change from where there are.
Yours, Daniel [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/hXenXDwtbMIVuBFZZI5rA2ykGAU/ On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:36 AM STARK, BARBARA H <bs7...@att.com> wrote: > Hi homenet, > While Michael and Daniel put some effort into their draft prior to IETF > 107, there's been no subsequent discussion of it on the list. And no new > activity on the draft. > In the absence of activity, Stephen and I don't think homenet should > request time during IETF 108. > > It may be time to close homenet and move the draft elsewhere (like maybe > INT area). > > If you disagree, this is best expressed this through technical discussion > and activities. > Thx, > Barbara > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > -- Daniel Migault Ericsson
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
