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
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.)
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
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
