Ok. Would the document shepherd for the bearer specification please raise your hand?
EH > -----Original Message----- > From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Murray S. Kucherawy > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 6:52 AM > To: oauth@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Encoding of Errors in the Base and in the Bearer > Spec > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf > > Of Eran Hammer > > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 12:19 AM > > To: SM > > Cc: oauth@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Encoding of Errors in the Base and in the > > Bearer Spec > > > > Don't know. In the 5 RFCs I've worked on, I - as editor - was the only > > personal who interacted with the IESG. Either way, it is usually the > > editor who is addressing questions about the text and proposing > > changes. > > It sounds like you've had some pretty hands-off shepherds in your > experience (as have I), or you dealt with the issues yourself which obviated > the need for that person to act. But formally, SM is correct about the > Document Shepherd's function. See RFC4858. > > -MSK > > _______________________________________________ > OAuth mailing list > OAuth@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
