Subject: [Jwt-reg-review] Request to Register JWT Confirmation Method: x5t#S256

From: Brian Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 12:16:12 -0600

Please review the registration request for the "x5t#S256" JWT confirmation
method found in section 9.1 of draft-ietf-oauth-mtls at
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-mtls-16#section-9.1

Thank you,
Brian Campbell - draft-ietf-oauth-mtls co-author

-- 
_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: Brian Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:19:02 -0600

Looking at
https://www.iana.org/assignments/jwt/jwt.xhtml#confirmation-methods I see
the DEs for the Confirmation Methods are John Bradley and Hannes
Tschofenig. John is a co-author of the document in question so his approval
is implied but also could be perceived as creating a conflict of interest.
So per https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7800#section-6 I think that means
that this should be "defer[ed] to the judgment of the other Experts". The
other experts are Hannes. Hannes co-chairs the WG that the document came
out of so I'd hope and expect that he'd approve of the registration too.
But I'll request that he respond in the affirmative to this message just
for procedural sake.