wfm
>
> From: Mike Jones
>To: "oauth@ietf.org"
>Cc: Mark Nottingham
>Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 3:11 PM
>Subject: [OAUTH-WG] FYI - Text resolving DISCUSS issue about Bearer URI Query
>Parameter method
>
>
>
>Dear working group members:
>
>I'm going thr
That works.
>
> From: Mike Jones
>To: "oauth@ietf.org"
>Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 3:12 PM
>Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Cache-Control headers for Bearer URI Query Parameter method
>
>
>
>Dear working group members:
>
>I'm going through the remaining open issues t
Dear working group members:
I'm going through the remaining open issues that have been raised about the
Bearer spec so as to be ready to publish an updated draft once the outstanding
consensus call issues are resolved.
Between -25 and -26 of the Core spec, the title was changed from "The OAut
Dear working group members:
I'm going through the remaining open issues that have been raised about the
Bearer spec so as to be ready to publish an updated draft once the outstanding
consensus call issues are resolved.
Amos Jeffries had cited this requirement in the HTTPbis spec (
http://t
Dear working group members:
I'm going through the remaining open issues that have been raised about the
Bearer spec so as to be ready to publish an updated draft once the outstanding
consensus call issues are resolved.
This DISCUSS had been raised about the URI Query Parameter method:
*
Just noticed an extra "and" in Draft 26
Sec 4.1.3
redirect_uri
REQUIRED, if the "redirect_uri" parameter was included in the
authorization request as described in Section 4.1.1,
and their values MUST be identical.
Eliminating the and would be better.
It would also
