Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Minor questions regarding draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-19

From: Mike Jones <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 07:18:54 +0000

Hi Hannes,

I have the changed the RFC 6755 and JWK references in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-20 in the manner that you suggested.

				-- Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: OAuth [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Hannes Tschofenig
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 4:49 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Minor questions regarding draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-19

Doing my shepherd write-up I had a few minor questions:

* Could you move the RFC 6755 reference to the normative reference section? Reason: the IANA consideration section depends on the existence of the urn:ietf:params:oauth registry.

* Could you move the JWK reference to the informative reference section?
Reason: The JWK is only used in an example and not essential to the implementation or understanding of the specification.

* Would it be sufficient to reference RFC 7159 instead of the [ECMAScript] reference?

* The document registers 'urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type' and it is used in the "type" header parameter.

The text, however, states that the value can also be set to jwt. Why would someone prefer to use urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type instead of the much shorter jwt value?

Ciao
Hannes