On 1/29/24 1:20 PM, Kristian Smith wrote:
[Mike to Bcc]
Hi David,
Thanks for reaching out. After a cursory look, you are correct. The
"ctx" parameter is not listed in RFC 7515.
It appears that we discuss derivation of the "ctx" parameter in an
earlier section (3.1.5.1.3.3). I will suggest the following as a
modification to the doc:
*From:*
"The JWT header fields MUST be given the following values. See
[RFC7515] <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=691168> section 4
for field descriptions."
*To:*
"The JWT header fields MUST be given the following values. See
[RFC7515] <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=691168> section 4
for field descriptions. The derivation for the "ctx" parameter is
discussed in section 3.1.5.1.3.3
<#Section_89dfb8d623b84963890891b34340e367>."
Would this document modification provide the needed clarity?
Yes, that sounds fine.
--
David Mulder
Labs Software Engineer, Samba
SUSE
1221 S Valley Grove Way, Suite 500
Pleasant Grove, UT 84062
(P)+1 385.208.2989
dmul...@suse.com
http://www.suse.com
_______________________________________________
cifs-protocol mailing list
cifs-protocol@lists.samba.org
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-protocol
