This PR removes a mention of refresh tokens.

draft-saxe-wimse-token-exchange-and-translation-protocol.md

@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ informative:
 
 --- abstract
 
-The specification defines the processes of token exchange and token translation for workloads.  Token exchange is introduced in {{RFC8693}}, allowing the exchange of access tokens, refresh tokens, OpenID Connect ID Token (OIDC), and SAML assertions for new OAuth access tokens. However, for workloads, there exist a broad array of input and output token types which must be considered beyond the input types supported by {{RFC8693}}.  These token types include, but are not limited to, SPIFFE SVIDs, x.509 certificates, Kerberos service tickets, Amazon sigv4A, macaroons, <...>.  Further, these tokens may be encoded in formats including JWT OAuth 2.0 Acesss Tokens {{RFC9068}}, CWT {{RFC8392}}, and protocol buffers (protobufs).  Given the variety and complexity of input and output token types and encoding, a strict token exchange that maintains all of the contextual information from the input token to the output token may not be possible.  We define these non-RFC8693 use cases with potentially lossy conversions as "token translation" (e.g. information may be lost in translation).   In this document we describe a workload profile for token exchange, using the mechanisms in {{RFC8693}}, and a new set of translations between arbitrary token types.  Additionally, we define mechanisms to enrich tokens during translation to support the use cases defined in (todo: add link to use cases doc).
+The specification defines the processes of token exchange and token translation for workloads.  Token exchange is introduced in {{RFC8693}}, allowing the exchange of access tokens, OpenID Connect ID Tokens, and SAML assertions for new OAuth access tokens. However, for workloads, there exist a broad array of input and output token types which must be considered beyond the input types supported by {{RFC8693}}.  These token types include, but are not limited to, SPIFFE SVIDs, x.509 certificates, Kerberos service tickets, Amazon sigv4A, macaroons, <...>.  Further, these tokens may be encoded in formats including JWT OAuth 2.0 Acesss Tokens {{RFC9068}}, CWT {{RFC8392}}, and protocol buffers (protobufs).  Given the variety and complexity of input and output token types and encoding, a strict token exchange that maintains all of the contextual information from the input token to the output token may not be possible.  We define these non-RFC8693 use cases with potentially lossy conversions as "token translation" (e.g. information may be lost in translation).   In this document we describe a workload profile for token exchange, using the mechanisms in {{RFC8693}}, and a new set of translations between arbitrary token types.  Additionally, we define mechanisms to enrich tokens during translation to support the use cases defined in (todo: add link to use cases doc).
 
 
 --- middle