Re: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Versions of Refactored OAuth Dynamic Client Registration Specs

[Richer, Justin P.]

Neither registration_access_token nor registration_client_uri are mentioned in 
core-16. They're both required in the management draft, and it makes sense 
there. If you're not implementing the management draft (or you've got your own 
thing for that), then you don't return either of them.

 -- Justin


From: OAuth [oauth-boun...@ietf.org] on behalf of Anthony Nadalin 
[tony...@microsoft.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 11:00 AM
To: Anthony Nadalin; Mike Jones; oauth@ietf.org list
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Versions of Refactored OAuth Dynamic 
Client Registration Specs

Same is true for the registration_client_uri as I may not need/want this, 
should be optional

From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Nadalin
Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 7:02 AM
To: Mike Jones; oauth@ietf.org list
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Versions of Refactored OAuth Dynamic 
Client Registration Specs

So the current core makes the registration_access_token  required and there are 
open registration endpoints, so this should be optional, there are also cases 
where the client_id is signed and that becomes the right to the registration 
endpoint

From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Friday, February 7, 2014 10:58 AM
To: oauth@ietf.org list
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Versions of Refactored OAuth Dynamic Client 
Registration Specs

There are now OAuth working group 
versions of the refactored OAuth Dynamic Client Registration specifications:

· OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Core Protocol

· OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Metadata

· OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Management Protocol

These versions address review comments by Phil Hunt and Tony Nadalin.  Phil is 
now also an author.  The data structures and messages used are the same as the 
previous versions.

The drafts are available at:

· http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-16

· http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-metadata-00

· http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-00

HTML formatted versions are also available at:

· https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-16.html

· 
https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-metadata-00.html

· 
https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-00.html

-- Mike

P.S.  I also posted this notice at http://self-issued.info/?p=1180 and as 
@selfissued.

___
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Versions of Refactored OAuth Dynamic Client Registration Specs

[Phil Hunt]

Where is registration_client_uri  in the spec?

Phil

@independentid
www.independentid.com
phil.h...@oracle.com

On 2014-03-06, at 4:00 PM, Anthony Nadalin  wrote:

> Same is true for the registration_client_uri as I may not need/want this, 
> should be optional
>  
> From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Nadalin
> Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 7:02 AM
> To: Mike Jones; oauth@ietf.org list
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Versions of Refactored OAuth Dynamic 
> Client Registration Specs
>  
> So the current core makes the registration_access_token  required and there 
> are open registration endpoints, so this should be optional, there are also 
> cases where the client_id is signed and that becomes the right to the 
> registration endpoint
>  
> From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
> Sent: Friday, February 7, 2014 10:58 AM
> To: oauth@ietf.org list
> Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Versions of Refactored OAuth Dynamic Client 
> Registration Specs
>  
> There are now OAuth working group versions of the refactored OAuth Dynamic 
> Client Registration specifications:
> · OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Core Protocol
> · OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Metadata
> · OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Management Protocol
>  
> These versions address review comments by Phil Hunt and Tony Nadalin.  Phil 
> is now also an author.  The data structures and messages used are the same as 
> the previous versions.
>  
> The drafts are available at:
> · http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-16
> · http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-metadata-00
> · http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-00
>  
> HTML formatted versions are also available at:
> · https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-16.html
> · 
> https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-metadata-00.html
> · 
> https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-00.html
>  
> -- Mike
>  
> P.S.  I also posted this notice at http://self-issued.info/?p=1180 and as 
> @selfissued.
>  
> ___
> 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

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Versions of Refactored OAuth Dynamic Client Registration Specs

[Anthony Nadalin]

Same is true for the registration_client_uri as I may not need/want this, 
should be optional

From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Nadalin
Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 7:02 AM
To: Mike Jones; oauth@ietf.org list
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Versions of Refactored OAuth Dynamic 
Client Registration Specs

So the current core makes the registration_access_token  required and there are 
open registration endpoints, so this should be optional, there are also cases 
where the client_id is signed and that becomes the right to the registration 
endpoint

From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Friday, February 7, 2014 10:58 AM
To: oauth@ietf.org list
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Versions of Refactored OAuth Dynamic Client 
Registration Specs

There are now OAuth working group 
versions of the refactored OAuth Dynamic Client Registration specifications:

* OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Core Protocol

* OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Metadata

* OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Management Protocol

These versions address review comments by Phil Hunt and Tony Nadalin.  Phil is 
now also an author.  The data structures and messages used are the same as the 
previous versions.

The drafts are available at:

* http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-16

* http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-metadata-00

* http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-00

HTML formatted versions are also available at:

* https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-16.html

* 
https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-metadata-00.html

* 
https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-00.html

-- Mike

P.S.  I also posted this notice at http://self-issued.info/?p=1180 and as 
@selfissued.

___
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Versions of Refactored OAuth Dynamic Client Registration Specs

[Anthony Nadalin]

So the current core makes the registration_access_token  required and there are 
open registration endpoints, so this should be optional, there are also cases 
where the client_id is signed and that becomes the right to the registration 
endpoint

From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Friday, February 7, 2014 10:58 AM
To: oauth@ietf.org list
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Working Group Versions of Refactored OAuth Dynamic Client 
Registration Specs

There are now OAuth working group 
versions of the refactored OAuth Dynamic Client Registration specifications:

* OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Core Protocol

* OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Metadata

* OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Management Protocol

These versions address review comments by Phil Hunt and Tony Nadalin.  Phil is 
now also an author.  The data structures and messages used are the same as the 
previous versions.

The drafts are available at:

* http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-16

* http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-metadata-00

* http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-00

HTML formatted versions are also available at:

* https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-16.html

* 
https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-metadata-00.html

* 
https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-00.html

-- Mike

P.S.  I also posted this notice at http://self-issued.info/?p=1180 and as 
@selfissued.

___
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

[OAUTH-WG] OAuth Dynamic Registration Management API: Our Lunch Chat Today

[Hannes Tschofenig]

Hi all,

several OAuth folks met today to talk about the next steps regarding the
OAuth dynamic client registration management API.

At the end of our short lunch chat I asked each participant individually
what they think should be done next. Here are the notes I took.

Phil: We need to document what events does the client want to notify the
server. Phil, volunteered to write a slide deck.

Justin: Document the deployment characteristics (for the different
client types). He also suggested to publish the current document as an
experimental draft and let people play around with it.

Tony: The work on the management API is not mature enough for
standardization

Mat: Decide what is in scope and what is out-of-scope.

Morteza: Investigate use cases further

Brian: Document use cases and assumptions

Mike: Focus on the dynamic registration and the meta-data work for now.
The management API is not mature enough.

John: We first need to figure out what we need the management API for.

Bill: Document what problem we are solving.

Kaoru: Document use cases and better understand the relationship with
the other specs.

As you can see the views are all over the map. It does, however, seem to
be useful to get a better understanding of the deployment and the use cases.

Ciao
Hannes



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

[Phil Hunt]

I'm getting the impression you don't want the particular meta data that's been 
specified. Hence why you want the separate spec.

What's the issue?  Maybe we should change the metadata?

I'd rather not see people do similar things that are done different ways. 
Whatever we do is already breaking for us, so nows the time to change it.

Phil

@independentid
www.independentid.com
phil.h...@oracle.com

On 2014-03-06, at 1:55 PM, Anthony Nadalin  wrote:

> +1  should not be merged
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Jones 
> Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 5:19 AM
> To: Anthony Nadalin; tors...@lodderstedt.net; oauth@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes
> 
> I also disagree with moving "scope" into the core registration spec.  The 
> metadata values in the core spec are those that are essential to use to 
> achieve registration.  Those in the metadata spec are those that are useful 
> in some applications but not needed by some others.  "scope" is of the second 
> class.
> 
>   -- Mike
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Nadalin
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:37 AM
> To: tors...@lodderstedt.net; oauth@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes
> 
> I'm not convinced that scope should be in core
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of 
> tors...@lodderstedt.net
> Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 12:38 AM
> To: oauth@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes
> 
> Hi,
> 
> regarding dynamic client registration: it has been suggested to merge core 
> and meta data, or at least move some elements (such as scopes) to the core 
> spec. Would you please add this?
> 
> regards,
> Torsten.
> 
> Am 05.03.2014 13:43, schrieb Hannes Tschofenig:
>> Hi al
>> 
>> here are the notes from the OAuth f2f meeting this week:
>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/minutes/minutes-89-oauth
>> 
>> They are rather short! If someone took some more detailed notes please 
>> send us a mail.
>> 
>> Ciao
>> Hannes & Derek
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 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
> 
> ___
> 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

___
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

[Anthony Nadalin]

+1  should not be merged

-Original Message-
From: Mike Jones 
Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 5:19 AM
To: Anthony Nadalin; tors...@lodderstedt.net; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

I also disagree with moving "scope" into the core registration spec.  The 
metadata values in the core spec are those that are essential to use to achieve 
registration.  Those in the metadata spec are those that are useful in some 
applications but not needed by some others.  "scope" is of the second class.

-- Mike

-Original Message-
From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Nadalin
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:37 AM
To: tors...@lodderstedt.net; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

I'm not convinced that scope should be in core

-Original Message-
From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of tors...@lodderstedt.net
Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 12:38 AM
To: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

Hi,

regarding dynamic client registration: it has been suggested to merge core and 
meta data, or at least move some elements (such as scopes) to the core spec. 
Would you please add this?

regards,
Torsten.

Am 05.03.2014 13:43, schrieb Hannes Tschofenig:
> Hi al
> 
> here are the notes from the OAuth f2f meeting this week:
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/minutes/minutes-89-oauth
> 
> They are rather short! If someone took some more detailed notes please 
> send us a mail.
> 
> Ciao
> Hannes & Derek
> 
> 
> ___
> 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

___
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

Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

[Phil Hunt]

If metadata is optional i don't see the issue with it being in core. 

Then again i don't think metadata should be in a separate draft. 

Phil

> On Mar 6, 2014, at 13:18, Mike Jones  wrote:
> 
> I also disagree with moving "scope" into the core registration spec.  The 
> metadata values in the core spec are those that are essential to use to 
> achieve registration.  Those in the metadata spec are those that are useful 
> in some applications but not needed by some others.  "scope" is of the second 
> class.
> 
>-- Mike
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Nadalin
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:37 AM
> To: tors...@lodderstedt.net; oauth@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes
> 
> I'm not convinced that scope should be in core
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of 
> tors...@lodderstedt.net
> Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 12:38 AM
> To: oauth@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes
> 
> Hi,
> 
> regarding dynamic client registration: it has been suggested to merge core 
> and meta data, or at least move some elements (such as scopes) to the core 
> spec. Would you please add this?
> 
> regards,
> Torsten.
> 
> Am 05.03.2014 13:43, schrieb Hannes Tschofenig:
>> Hi al
>> 
>> here are the notes from the OAuth f2f meeting this week:
>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/minutes/minutes-89-oauth
>> 
>> They are rather short! If someone took some more detailed notes please 
>> send us a mail.
>> 
>> Ciao
>> Hannes & Derek
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 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
> 
> ___
> 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

___
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

[Richer, Justin P.]

I would like everything from the metadata spec moved to core with the same 
optionality that it has in the two documents, in order to facilitate 
readability and ease of use for developers. I would be fine with having it in 
listed in two separate subsections.

Also, so it doesn't get lost, we should adopt the "jwks" metadata parameter 
from OIDC as well, to go alongside of jwks_uri.

 -- Justin


From: OAuth [oauth-boun...@ietf.org] on behalf of tors...@lodderstedt.net 
[tors...@lodderstedt.net]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 3:38 AM
To: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

Hi,

regarding dynamic client registration: it has been suggested to merge
core and meta data, or at least move some elements (such as scopes) to
the core spec. Would you please add this?

regards,
Torsten.

Am 05.03.2014 13:43, schrieb Hannes Tschofenig:
> Hi al
>
> here are the notes from the OAuth f2f meeting this week:
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/minutes/minutes-89-oauth
>
> They are rather short! If someone took some more detailed notes please
> send us a mail.
>
> Ciao
> Hannes & Derek
>
>
> ___
> 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

___
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

[Mike Jones]

I also disagree with moving "scope" into the core registration spec.  The 
metadata values in the core spec are those that are essential to use to achieve 
registration.  Those in the metadata spec are those that are useful in some 
applications but not needed by some others.  "scope" is of the second class.

-- Mike

-Original Message-
From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Nadalin
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:37 AM
To: tors...@lodderstedt.net; oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

I'm not convinced that scope should be in core

-Original Message-
From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of tors...@lodderstedt.net
Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 12:38 AM
To: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

Hi,

regarding dynamic client registration: it has been suggested to merge core and 
meta data, or at least move some elements (such as scopes) to the core spec. 
Would you please add this?

regards,
Torsten.

Am 05.03.2014 13:43, schrieb Hannes Tschofenig:
> Hi al
> 
> here are the notes from the OAuth f2f meeting this week:
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/minutes/minutes-89-oauth
> 
> They are rather short! If someone took some more detailed notes please 
> send us a mail.
> 
> Ciao
> Hannes & Derek
> 
> 
> ___
> 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

___
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

Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

[Brian Campbell]

While I'm sure we can and will discuss the organization of the documents
for some
time, I wanted to reiterate that I believe the client credential management
part of this needs to be reevaluated (not just reorganized).


On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Anthony Nadalin wrote:

> I'm not convinced that scope should be in core
>
> -Original Message-
> From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> tors...@lodderstedt.net
> Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 12:38 AM
> To: oauth@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes
>
> Hi,
>
> regarding dynamic client registration: it has been suggested to merge core
> and meta data, or at least move some elements (such as scopes) to the core
> spec. Would you please add this?
>
> regards,
> Torsten.
>
> Am 05.03.2014 13:43, schrieb Hannes Tschofenig:
> > Hi al
> >
> > here are the notes from the OAuth f2f meeting this week:
> > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/minutes/minutes-89-oauth
> >
> > They are rather short! If someone took some more detailed notes please
> > send us a mail.
> >
> > Ciao
> > Hannes & Derek
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

[Anthony Nadalin]

I'm not convinced that scope should be in core

-Original Message-
From: OAuth [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of tors...@lodderstedt.net
Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 12:38 AM
To: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

Hi,

regarding dynamic client registration: it has been suggested to merge core and 
meta data, or at least move some elements (such as scopes) to the core spec. 
Would you please add this?

regards,
Torsten.

Am 05.03.2014 13:43, schrieb Hannes Tschofenig:
> Hi al
> 
> here are the notes from the OAuth f2f meeting this week:
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/minutes/minutes-89-oauth
> 
> They are rather short! If someone took some more detailed notes please 
> send us a mail.
> 
> Ciao
> Hannes & Derek
> 
> 
> ___
> 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

___
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Discussion about Dynamic Client Registration Management Work

[Matt Miller]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 3/4/14, 6:04 PM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> at today's OAuth meeting I suggested to get together during the
> week to continue our conversation about
> draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-00, which dominated our
> conversation at the meeting today.
> 
> I would suggest to get together on **Thursday, at 11:30** (for
> lunch) at the IETF registration desk.
> 
> Objections?*
> 
> Ciao Hannes
> 
> PS: I know that your schedule during the IETF meeting is quite full
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> ___ OAuth mailing list 
> OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
> 
 Works for me, too.


- -- 
- - m&m

Matt Miller < mamil...@cisco.com >
Cisco Systems, Inc.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTGDpQAAoJEDWi+S0W7cO1laUH/A8Uh3E2fRXRLrcyW+CvoUdz
xYIaH4NcTmpwuNnAlDv1eYiNqee4rPIPsdMDjWV4tdEpxj/Ctf0e6gQ1piTnTCsg
rckSguZGmA1uMa4o+AvyNuXIunQaaBA64jXc+jAXWsQkFxNRRI35tN7dHDxLgDb1
KO4OEaveWJkGwQsSdNymmwbqKcikpMdJ/4t9SWbxaIh5xo7N9dH7kwjiLbsltmcc
NsAMbBMUM3VYBidaDIW0G6Udzwof/gJC4mEInk9Ns0/PeshInLX+bUqhYi5I3a29
5ZH81M0aQMgWgRtWJ8/Jv9t93sZRHpCr3j5Cxnq4MzkkaiejE/troD/BjiFFm5w=
=OQW1
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Re: [OAUTH-WG] IETF #89 OAuth Meeting Notes

[torsten]

Hi,

regarding dynamic client registration: it has been suggested to merge 
core and meta data, or at least move some elements (such as scopes) to 
the core spec. Would you please add this?


regards,
Torsten.

Am 05.03.2014 13:43, schrieb Hannes Tschofenig:

Hi al

here are the notes from the OAuth f2f meeting this week:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/minutes/minutes-89-oauth

They are rather short! If someone took some more detailed notes please
send us a mail.

Ciao
Hannes & Derek


___
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