[OAUTH-WG] Device Authorization Grant Interval
Janak Amarasena <janakama360@gmail.com> Tue, 21 May 2019 05:21 UTC
Return-Path: <janakama360@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3424A120121 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2019 22:21:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c3FwT6hN4vL9 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2019 22:21:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x42f.google.com (mail-wr1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE06412009C for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2019 22:21:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id m3so3973058wrv.2 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2019 22:21:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=LnJN0VoXNr6pL4rZXefpU7ZU/VfQVoNxsR4jzZerjY4=; b=TGMQAu7BwGPaTLGFcOergribzRRGJXauvrpHR7aJ3Ktq18eOgJg1s/nC0U2HFuzC8P yp6l6jNkmpjMDKm1FOQVDF849c5k02UW8d+tskr97rg1DixMktD7iR96f4OJ+eYrRgd2 BH1KPkyWQGJlDPec3L+3V+8nu2mT+exFcrY3i5Py87CDsbKInFc+eZGoeG4jxKHqRHET dvRhUNpZThVH+kRM/KrLLdPe6yyMhMwj/Dcs92tY4fl2+tnAv09UtR+tie6+wJnCYn/1 /oqFb5CDp9KQOrawHWoXcLRaAVKCXYkKEsF6R2EtQ8QkFGG724nYrgDvYSsNExGXYiBb Qm3Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=LnJN0VoXNr6pL4rZXefpU7ZU/VfQVoNxsR4jzZerjY4=; b=EjxVTrH65OnglFDSDymz25iCt04/gQw0kAvbRun3PrRMMDtFrSMI2w5sHpn08lwvHo WEQ1sCo1xtb7TKoBBgn2sZ0Ojn6oyGD+gvChZ7y5RbKcCoAonCOA+Dq7mTSGd7EAV++w u6dX4LVy1LaBSvEOxPuIpwWg6oxspN9vkxDB4Y6I4TJMbJbedMBYS6h75kD7hSyGrVL+ Bt0YH36uvs33TMPddJRAwsOTghPmYyjYrIKWLr1MW8j2Puf+sTf9g1tWSfb/WDhomEvf 4Hz5SCvhBZVFOe5arZN1YE7KEcQHQ0MavH6LkipUyAuDO7Isx1HPOawHB3fFXt43pxVV lsrQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW6jNQswz0Y9krygP21LaERCDGDlF+OFNTnh6UbNlo1zcgrPZkt 6/1nEx8ByoRMT6uBpKzdbD9fW7oPdBJ3+OW4nWWdh5bq
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxwT4VpGYsca3kNXiI/T1zmKPtENxI31m9bPQCidzEO3GZslOFqYJvDHcqmysxBQk4hi8qgLCE5Mq0uSbz1Dw0=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:45c1:: with SMTP id b1mr38282995wrs.252.1558416073374; Mon, 20 May 2019 22:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Janak Amarasena <janakama360@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 10:51:02 +0530
Message-ID: <CAM7dPt0nS=+6oACUTc=sXnw3dpEqMB3ETq03iYnM1HsLv2_OQg@mail.gmail.com>
To: oauth@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000773eaa05895f04fd"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/G7Th34NLGXruEFwACMT-JJ6OMqw>
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Device Authorization Grant Interval
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 21 May 2019 05:21:16 -0000
Hi all, In the OAuth2 Device Authorization Grant, what would be an appropriate response if the client does not respect the set polling interval and keeps on polling with a lower interval? Thank you, Best Regards, Janak Amarasena
- [OAUTH-WG] Device Authorization Grant Interval Janak Amarasena
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device Authorization Grant Interval Joseph Heenan
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device Authorization Grant Interval Janak Amarasena
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device Authorization Grant Interval Aaron Parecki
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device Authorization Grant Interval William Denniss
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device Authorization Grant Interval Janak Amarasena