Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's No Objection on draft-ietf-oauth-par-08: (with COMMENT)

From: Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 07:44:37 -0700

Zaheduzzaman Sarker has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-oauth-par-08: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-par/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the efforts on this document.

I think RFC6749 should be in the normative reference. To understand, implement
and use this document one has to understand RFC6749 first.

---

From: Brian Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 11:57:08 -0600

Thanks Zaheduzzaman,

Indeed it was intended that RFC6749 be a normative reference. But we had a
little oversight/mixup with the tooling (mmark), which should be corrected
with https://github.com/oauthstuff/draft-oauth-par/commit/2c78427a9 (all
but one of the RFC6749 citations were marked with the normative modifier
but it picked up the one that wasn't).

-- 
_CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and privileged 
material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review, use, 
distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited.  If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately 
by e-mail and delete the message and any file attachments from your 
computer. Thank you._

---

From: Zaheduzzaman Sarker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 18:20:36 +0000

Thanks for the information. Hopefully it will get fixed in the next version.

BR
Zahed

On 2021-06-29, 19:57, "Brian Campbell" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

Thanks Zaheduzzaman,

Indeed it was intended that RFC6749 be a normative reference. But we had a little oversight/mixup with the tooling (mmark), which should be corrected with https://github.com/oauthstuff/draft-oauth-par/commit/2c78427a9<https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=126d0db2-4df637f7-126d4d29-867b36d1634c-6d82087b68771974&q=1&e=0883df6d-bd3f-47ad-8897-53f2697ef7f4&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Foauthstuff%2Fdraft-oauth-par%2Fcommit%2F2c78427a9> (all but one of the RFC6749 citations were marked with the normative modifier but it picked up the one that wasn't).

On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 8:44 AM Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
Zaheduzzaman Sarker has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-oauth-par-08: No Objection

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any file attachments from your computer. Thank you.