Telechat Review of draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-09
review-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-09-genart-telechat-halpern-2017-01-24-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 34) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2017-01-31 | |
| Requested | 2017-01-06 | |
| Authors | Nat Sakimura , John Bradley , Michael Jones | |
| Draft last updated | 2017-01-24 | |
| Completed reviews |
Opsdir Telechat review of -09
by
Warren "Ace" Kumari
(diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -09 by Stephen Kent (diff) Genart Telechat review of -09 by Joel M. Halpern (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -11 by Warren "Ace" Kumari (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -11 by Stephen Kent (diff) Genart Last Call review of -11 by Joel M. Halpern (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -30 by Watson Ladd (diff) Genart Last Call review of -30 by Joel M. Halpern (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Joel M. Halpern |
| State | Completed | |
| Review |
review-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-09-genart-telechat-halpern-2017-01-24
|
|
| Reviewed revision | 09 (document currently at 34) | |
| Result | Not Ready | |
| Completed | 2017-01-24 |
review-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-09-genart-telechat-halpern-2017-01-24-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-?? Reviewer: Joel Halpern Review Date: 2017-01-24 IETF LC End Date: None IESG Telechat date: 2017-02-02 Summary: This document is not ready for publication as a standards track RFC. [Reviewers note: It is quite possible that the problem listed below is my error. In that case, this should be considered as ready with minor issues.] Major issues: I can not find any record of an IETF last call for this document. I looked in the document history and the IETF discussion list. If I missed it, I apologize for being oblivious. Minor issues: Why is the example if section 4 (and others later on) described as "non-normative"? Is it incomplete? incorrect? An example is, by definition, not a full specification. The language seems designed to reduce the value of the example. I would recommend removing all the "non-normative" notes from the examples. They are clearly stated to be examples. Nits/editorial comments: