Re: [OAUTH-WG] [Errata Rejected] RFC7591 (6619)

2021-06-23 Thread Hony Habesha
What is this please tell me ? On Wed, 23 Jun 2021, 07:49 RFC Errata System, wrote: > The following errata report has been rejected for RFC7591, > "OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Protocol". > > -- > You may review the report below and at: > https://www.r

Re: [OAUTH-WG] [Errata Rejected] RFC7591 (6619)

2021-06-23 Thread Megan Ferguson
Greetings, FYI - this report has been deleted. A copy has been forwarded to webmas...@tools.ietf.org. Thank you. RFC Editor/mf > On Jun 23, 2021, at 12:48 AM, RFC Errata System > wrote: > > The following errata report has been rejected for RFC7591, > "OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration

[OAUTH-WG] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-introspection-response-11: (with COMMENT)

2021-06-23 Thread Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-introspection-response-11: 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.)

Re: [OAUTH-WG] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7591 (6619)

2021-06-23 Thread John R. Levine
Fair enough, I guess. The HTML versions of the older RFCs must be peppered with bad links if this is the case. Yes, we've gotten a steady trickle of reports like this. The htmlizing script is available if someone wants to play with it but I think we're already in the region of diminishing ret