Re: [OAUTH-WG] Device profile draft

David Recordon <recordond@gmail.com> Fri, 27 August 2010 20:28 UTC

Return-Path: <recordond@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 2C15A3A68F3 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.447
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.151, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 jLjCe2p3K-yR for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:28:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-bw0-f44.google.com (mail-bw0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80B243A687B for <oauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:28:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by bwz9 with SMTP id 9so2666047bwz.31 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=xGfKi6tEakWpiIYcwq2nJLFxojgQnafELxOOx9ZjMyA=; b=GqDw43muLo+nFTEP1KIVRpyo+Tar6mgQ5qETwRpfN48wQBngUnI6mpbUILCJpBZ8cL 7sJw89l0nGRizn9Rl8aYAGvbShZZlrwwFhuPXQjJ33GyWFrsLdnfimnMPzOxuziK1eMP rklePX/dp5DK8FYeo0jMSaTnol2k9Rd4PCIck=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=sJwNwHJZnVcKeHG4xbxYeBpKPv4WEwQ/fr7asItBAbCVmKeb55XRjgnHemXzl3M0yz p6rpdaoK+h9FqagsEFQIwwNWoMSP0l/KI6BchO79l4HFL+mD5mTcCvGFmPsL1pxpCOqA 0opCkJE1+iua5TCWIb7j8nGeonFuqbMhK2nO4=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.69.18 with SMTP id x18mr892652bki.34.1282940942927; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:29:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.204.7.139 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:29:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinw4TRkSr0P4uhNM-JvlaUFxjmRdvPnkhs2GtMh@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTimwAtY91GtsaUICsHNkh2a4zS0kJTbr6xs7W7lI@mail.gmail.com> <5710F82C0E73B04FA559560098BF95B124F9688DD4@USNAVSXCHMBSA3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com> <AANLkTinq3OFHhmVSgrKTbmkFx1XrQiNTYNrTlyinAlX_@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimF549Xkw1eMeEiJMvpLQ4ut01zPpzHm3ZBzJmU@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinw4TRkSr0P4uhNM-JvlaUFxjmRdvPnkhs2GtMh@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 20:29:02 +0000
Message-ID: <AANLkTimPz16vyH0U+UbeKoVAdAnXG2A_A4a1ZrV=67QO@mail.gmail.com>
From: David Recordon <recordond@gmail.com>
To: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001636c5b38f2bc84b048ed3f785"
Cc: "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com>
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: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 20:28:33 -0000

While it's been a few weeks, I've made these changes and posted the Device
profile as an Internet Draft:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-recordon-oauth-v2-device-00. We're working
on an implementation at Facebook and hope to provide feedback toward the
next draft.

In the meantime I'd like to request that it move to become a Working Group
item. I'm am happy to continue acting as the editor.

--David


On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 9:41 PM, David Recordon <recordond@gmail.com> wrote:

> Even better, thanks!
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Michael D Adams <mike@automattic.com>wrote:
>
>> 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 mailing list
>> OAuth@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>
>
>