<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#467886;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:11.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#467886" vlink="#96607D" style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Dear WG Members, the editors agree the iGov OAuth 2.0 profile v 05 is not yet ready for advancing in the approval process. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>- Aaron’s substantial feedback in listserv archive: <a href="https://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-igov/Week-of-Mon-20250203/000336.html">[Openid-specs-igov] Action required: WGLC - Seeking WG consensus on iGov OAuth 2.0 profile readiness to begin Implementers Draft review process</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>- Ongoing resolution of Aaron’s comments, where straightforward, is ongoing in this branch <a href="https://bitbucket.org/openid/igov/branch/WGLC-aaron-1">openid / igov / Branch WGLC-aaron-1 — Bitbucket</a> Once complete, the editors will generate a single PR for those corrections.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>- Two items of feedback appear to the editors to indicate a more substantial shift in the profile is required. Although shifting would modernize iGov and improve alignment with FAPI, the editors want to be sensitive to potential impacts to stakeholders. Each question has an issue to gather WG input:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> - Should we replace Full Client, Native Client, and Direct Access Client types with “public clients” and “confidential clients”?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <a href="https://bitbucket.org/openid/igov/issues/56/igov-oauth-replace-full-native-and-direct">openid / igov / issues / #56 - [iGov-OAuth] Replace "Full", "Native", and "Direct Client" types with "Confidential" and "Public client" — Bitbucket</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> - Should we adopt RFC 9068 JSON Web Token (JWT) Profile for OAuth 2.0 Access Tokens and eliminate “bearer tokens” as currently defined in the profile?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <a href="https://bitbucket.org/openid/igov/issues/57/igov-oauth-eliminate-bearer-tokens-in">openid / igov / issues / #57 - [iGov-OAuth] Eliminate "bearer tokens" in favor of RFC 9068 JSON Web Token (JWT) Profile for OAuth 2.0 Access Tokens — Bitbucket</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>- Following resolution of these items and publishing a new editors’ draft (06), the editors intend to send another WGLC message.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Thank you!<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Kelley Burgin and Tom Clancy, editors<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>