Hi Ketan,
thanks for your review. We removed the IANA.JOSE reference and made all
other references to IANA registries informative, as you suggested.
See https://github.com/oauth-wg/draft-ietf-oauth-status-list/pull/331
Best regards, Paul+Christian
On 12/22/25 09:39, Ketan Talaulikar via Datatracker wrote:
Ketan Talaulikar has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-oauth-status-list-14: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer to
https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-status-list/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks to the authors and the WG for their work on this document.
I have a couple of comments/queries to share:
1) [IANA.JOSE] is cited as a normative reference without any reference to it.
2) I am not sure if the multiple IANA registries listed as references are
normative. Please check if they are more suited as informative.
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
