|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
IETF RFC 7591
|
|
Title:
|
RFC 7591: OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Protocol, IETF, July 2015
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
RFC 7591 was published as an IETF Proposed Standard in July 2015. Finalized IETF document.
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
RFC 7591 defines the OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Protocol and establishes the IANA "OAuth Dynamic Client Registration Metadata" registry. X.f2sp Section 7.2.2.1.1 defines a new client metadata parameter (use_mtls_endpoint_aliases) as an extension to this registry, and Section II (IANA Considerations) explicitly requests registration of this parameter "in the IANA 'OAuth Dynamic Client Registration Metadata' registry established by [RFC7591]." This is a direct normative dependency for the IANA registration action. Incorporation of the full text is inappropriate as only the registry mechanism and client metadata model are referenced. Freely available. No ITU-T or ISO/IEC equivalent.
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
No known patent claims. Freely available.
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
Published July 2015. Widely implemented for programmatic client registration in OAuth 2.0 deployments. Freely available at https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7591.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
Stable, finalized IETF Proposed Standard. Not revised since July 2015.
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
Defines the client registration extension mechanism used by multiple IETF OAuth specifications. Companion document is RFC 7592 (also referenced in X.f2sp). No ITU-T/ISO/IEC equivalent.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
Normative references within RFC 7591: RFC 2119, RFC 3986, RFC 5246, RFC 6749, RFC 7159. All IETF documents; IETF is qualified under Annex B.
|
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
|
|
