Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device profile draft
Michael D Adams <mike@automattic.com> Thu, 15 July 2010 21:32 UTC
Return-Path: <michael.d.adams@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAA983A6831 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:32:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.833
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.833 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.144, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zyEMWlmoMwi1 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:32:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BED4D3A67CF for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:32:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iwn38 with SMTP id 38so1474012iwn.31 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:32:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:from:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4Q4iDjSrh3SdICzQs6KnXGbOCsmT9JDwrHZJ4K73M94=; b=LqQGRGgRwEZWGgt7hFeGCILQNIdy1cg0t/L3gpnkre1tLPTB16FVfLeWRz35MBbRdT Qei7nzow6NjiEnLFZtHs1Ov1/xt02XKI2kKNuGxs/eBcXDsRr9wOHYtxE+EB9Q/IBdW0 ttMklnrR32dAxkYWJjIwdaOQjuNR2wshIIDIY=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=LQO/KikM2b9DU89cTOrfBbTuNjmi/Z5hxohoD4+KqfidtpoQg5i30+EDloI6DABi0G HeGLeGXc+pyhvQS5jwB6jMrt7WGpWOOt08pJooeeo0l+VF2ueKFFuSHJ7p7FMg0LC+6h R5zSGNIpDne8QVT8qrsHShJ/DAF4yNfOQuw6E=
Received: by 10.231.16.76 with SMTP id n12mr18847835iba.194.1279229533293; Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:32:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: michael.d.adams@gmail.com
Received: by 10.231.179.143 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:31:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinq3OFHhmVSgrKTbmkFx1XrQiNTYNrTlyinAlX_@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTimwAtY91GtsaUICsHNkh2a4zS0kJTbr6xs7W7lI@mail.gmail.com> <5710F82C0E73B04FA559560098BF95B124F9688DD4@USNAVSXCHMBSA3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com> <AANLkTinq3OFHhmVSgrKTbmkFx1XrQiNTYNrTlyinAlX_@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael D Adams <mike@automattic.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:31:53 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: vyxjYgCT7j4_EEJlbTiKKN0WPms
Message-ID: <AANLkTimF549Xkw1eMeEiJMvpLQ4ut01zPpzHm3ZBzJmU@mail.gmail.com>
To: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device profile draft
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 21:32:05 -0000
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 2:11 PM, David Recordon <recordond@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Zeltsan, Zachary (Zachary) >> “The client makes the following request at an arbitrary but reasonable >> interval which MUST NOT exceed the minimum interval rate provided by >> the authorization server (if present via the "interval" parameter).” >> >> My understanding is that the intervals between the client’s subsequent >> requests must not be less than the value provided by the “interval” >> parameter (if it is present). If that is correct than the intervals between >> the subsequent requests MUST exceed (or be equal to) the value of the >> “interval” parameter. > > Thanks! Reworded to "The client makes the following request at an arbitrary > but reasonable interval which MUST NOT be less than the minimum interval > rate provided by the authorization server" It still sounds confusing to me. Part of the problem is that we're talking both about an interval (a length of time) and a frequency (requests per unit of time). How about: The client makes the next request after an arbitrary but reasonable length of time, which MUST be longer than or equal to the minimum length of time provided by the authorization server in the "interval" parameter if present. I changed "following" to "next" because the former makes it sound like the next paragraph will have details about the request. I changed "at an arbitrary" to "after an arbitrary" since we're talking here about lengths of time. I replaced "interval" with "length of time" to make it clear we're talking about the length of time and not the corresponding frequency. Mike --mdawaffe
- [OAUTH-WG] Device profile draft David Recordon
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device profile draft George Fletcher
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device profile draft David Recordon
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device profile draft Zeltsan, Zachary (Zachary)
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device profile draft David Recordon
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device profile draft Michael D Adams
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device profile draft David Recordon
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device profile draft David Recordon