On 25/02/2019 18:08, Jim Schaad wrote:
3. In section 8.3 - Is/Should there be a requirement that the error also be registered in an OAuth registry? If so then this needs to be part of the expert reviewer instructions on this registry.The expert reviewer instructions already state this: "Since a high degree of overlap is expected between these registries and the contents of the OAuth parameters registries, experts should require new registrations to maintain a reasonable level of alignment with parameters from OAuth that have comparable functionality." This includes the error registry, do you think this is sufficiently clear or should I elaborate?The question I had was the difference between SHOULD and MUST be registered. The text there says - try and keep them in sync, but if they are not it is not a problem. If that is what you want then this is not a problem, I was just validating this.
The intention of the "should require ... a reasonable level of alignment" was "try and keep them in sync, but if they are not you need a good reason for this". Your alternate interpretation makes me think the text is not worded strongly enough.
4. In section 8.4 - Is there a reason to require a specification for this registry? Should it be sufficient to have somebody request that a mapping be registered and the DE approves it? The previous comment would applytoall of the mapping registries that are just mappings.The idea is to prevent the squatting of low byte count abbreviations by parameters that are not frequently used, thus there is a range of different policies for different integer abbreviation number ranges. (note: I'm following the example of the CWT specification here)Not requiring a document to exists could still allow this. IANA would still have the DE approve the assignment.
Ok so you mean not having "specification required" for -65536 to -257 and 256 to 65535 and not having "standards action" for -256 to 255 would be ok?
Note that this would be different from the policy in RFC 8392 (CWT). /Ludwig -- Ludwig Seitz, PhD Security Lab, RISE Phone +46(0)70-349 92 51
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
