Maybe they have a good reason for not wanting it, and then we shouldn't be the WG that backdoor's it in. Also: "other people have already implemented it" is a cognitive fallacy, so let's not use that as a justification we have to make the standard.
We should get a concrete reason why a WG that seems like the appropriate one, thinks it wouldn't make sense. If it is just a matter of timing, then whatever. But if there are concrete recommendations from that group, I would love to hear them. On Fri, Aug 5, 2022 at 10:26 AM Daniel Fett <fett= 40danielfett...@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > Am 05.08.22 um 10:22 schrieb Warren Parad: > > > and nobody involved in the JWP effort thinks that SD-JWT should be in > that WG once created > > Why? > > For the reasons listed, I guess? > > Also, mind the "As far as I am aware" part, but I don't remember any > discussions in that direction at IETF114. > > -Daniel > > _______________________________________________ > 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
