ON response?
> both are valid options
> > quote_type
> >
> > Best regards.
> >
> > From: OAuth on behalf of
> > "torsten=40lodderstedt....@dmarc.ietf.org"
> >
> > Date: Tuesday, 13 June 2023 at 10:19
> > To: "Jorge.OlivaFernandez=4
n=40lodderstedt@dmarc.ietf.org"
,
"Jorge.OlivaFernandez=40santander.co...@dmarc.ietf.org"
, "Oliva Fernandez,
Jorge"
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" , Brian Campbell
, Kai Lehmann
Subject: [EXT]Re: [OAUTH-WG] RFC 9396 - RAR doubt about examples
CAUTION: This message is f
.OlivaFernandez=40santander.co...@dmarc.ietf.org"
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" , Brian Campbell
, Kai Lehmann
Subject: [EXT]Re: [OAUTH-WG] RFC 9396 - RAR doubt about examples
CAUTION: This message is from an EXTERNAL sender – be vigilant, particularly
with links and attachments. If you suspect i
, Kai Lehmann
Subject: [EXT]Re: [OAUTH-WG] RFC 9396 - RAR doubt about examples
CAUTION: This message is from an EXTERNAL sender – be vigilant, particularly
with links and attachments. If you suspect it, report it immediately using the
phishing button.
Hi,
the difference between secti
does not care about where the money
> > > is coming from as long as it is being transferred to the target account.
> > > However, the RS which is actually performing the transfer operation may
> > > need this.
> > >
> > > /Kai
> > >
> > &g
11:21
> *To: *Kai Lehmann , "Oliva Fernandez, Jorge" <
> jorge.olivafernan...@santander.co.uk>, "oauth@ietf.org"
> *Subject: *Re: Re: [OAUTH-WG] RFC 9396 - RAR doubt about examples
>
>
>
> Hi Kai, and thanks for your response,
>
>
>
>
> On 2 Jun 2023, at 14:10, Oliva Fernandez, Jorge
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Reviewing the just releases RFC there are a couple of examples that seems
> incorrect or maybe I’m missing something, in section 9.1 and 9.2 appear a
> field “debtorAccount” outside the “authorization_details” object
From: "Oliva Fernandez, Jorge"
Date: Monday, 12. June 2023 at 11:21
To: Kai Lehmann , "Oliva Fernandez, Jorge"
, "oauth@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: Re: [OAUTH-WG] RFC 9396 - RAR doubt about examples
Hi Kai, and thanks for your response,
The thing is that in section 9
Authorization Details in Token Response” in example of
Figure 17?
Best regards.
From: OAuth on behalf of Kai Lehmann
Date: Monday, 12 June 2023 at 09:22
To: "Oliva Fernandez, Jorge"
, "oauth@ietf.org"
Subject: [EXT]Re: [OAUTH-WG] RFC 9396 - RAR doubt about examples
C
the money is transferred TO and of course the amount of the
transferred money.
Best,
Kai
From: OAuth on behalf of "Oliva Fernandez, Jorge"
Date: Monday, 12. June 2023 at 10:08
To: "oauth@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] RFC 9396 - RAR doubt about examples
Hi,
Any commen
Hi,
Any comment about this? Thanks!
Best regards.
From: "Oliva Fernandez, Jorge"
Date: Friday, 2 June 2023 at 14:10
To: "oauth@ietf.org"
Subject: RFC 9396 - RAR doubt about examples
Hi,
Reviewing the just releases RFC there are a couple of examples that seems
incorrect or maybe I’m missing
Hi,
Reviewing the just releases RFC there are a couple of examples that seems
incorrect or maybe I’m missing something, in section 9.1 and 9.2 appear a field
“debtorAccount” outside the “authorization_details” object and in section 9.1
specify:
“debtorAccount:
API-specific field containing
12 matches
Mail list logo
