It's working like you want it to be.

In other words, you have a web app running on a single server with a
single IP. You make authenticated requests using each user's account.
If your IP is whitelisted, the calls go towards your 20k limit, if it
is not whitelisted, it goes against the current 150 limit for the
respective accounts. That's what it means by "IP whitelisting takes
precedence to account rate limits".

--
Hwee-Boon

On Jul 23, 3:02 pm, srikanth reddy <srikanth.yara...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Abraham Williams <4bra...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> <<
> Each user and each IP has 150 calls/hour. If five applications (desktop or
> web) are making calls on behalf of a single user or IP they count against
> the same 150. Rate limiting has no connection to applications.
>
>
>
> Agreed. i have no issues with desktop apps as each user owns one (in which
> case ip/user does not matter and am pretty happy with 150 limit).
>
> But i am trying to understand this ip limit for web apps
>
> The  whole confusion is regarding this statement 
> inhttp://apiwiki.twitter.com/Rate-limiting
>
> "IP whitelisting takes precedence to account rate limits. *GET requests from
> a whitelisted IP address made on a user's behalf will be deducted from the
> whitelisted IP's limit, not the users*. Therefore, IP-based whitelisting is
> a best practice for applications that request many users' data"
>
> If the above holds true my consumer web app could end up serving very few
> authenticated users. As you said it should be the other way.
> May be some one who has developed and encountered this problem with a webapp
> (with out being whitelisted) can confirm.
>
> Thanks
> Srikanth
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 15:06, srikanth reddy 
> > <srikanth.yara...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> @Abraham: Does it mean my consumer app (not Desktop client) cannot serve
> >> more than 150 authorized users/hour(if it is not white listed). It is hard
> >> to believe.
> >> If it is desktop client the 150 limit is understandable.
>
> > Each user and each IP has 150 calls/hour. If five applications (desktop or
> > web) are making calls on behalf of a single user or IP they count against
> > the same 150. Rate limiting has no connection to applications.
>
> >> The blog post says
>
> >> "This limit applies to your Twitter account rather than the applications
> >> which make the calls to the API i.e. you have 100 API calls per hour in
> >> total regardless of which Twitter applications you use - it is NOT 100 API
> >> calls per application"
>
> >> As you said
>
> >> "Also it used to be that user requests from a whitelisted IP would
> >> reflect on the users limit unless they had hit their rate limit at which
> >> point it would count against the IP."
>
> >> its probably first user and then IP.
>
> > Yes. User then IP.
>
> >> " POST request have their own limits"
> >> yes i do not mean infinite calls but my consumer app should be able to get
> >> more than 20k request tokens
>
> >> Thanks for your time. Really helpful
> >> Srikanth
>
> >> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 7:41 PM, Abraham Williams <4bra...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >>> In your first email you said "When I check an oAuth'd user's rate limit,
> >>> he also seems gets 20000 API hits." so I'm not sure what you are seeing.
> >>> Also it used to be that user requests from a whitelisted IP would reflect
> >>> on the users limit unless they had hit their rate limit at which point it
> >>> would count against the IP. I'm not sure if it still works this way 
> >>> though.
> >>> Abraham
>
> >>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 08:43, sjespers <se...@webkitchen.be> wrote:
>
> >>>> @Abraham: If that were true then calling rate_limit_status should give
> >>>> the same result... which it doesn't!
>
> >>>> On Jul 22, 3:26 pm, Abraham Williams <4bra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> > I recommend that you both read:
> >>>>http://apiwiki.twitter.com/Rate-limiting
>
> >>>> > Serge: If you have an IP that is white listed all applicable calls
> >>>> from that
> >>>> > IP will count against the 20000 limit.
>
> >>>> > Srikanth: That blog post says that twitter.com has no limit. It says
> >>>> nothing
> >>>> > about anybody else not having a limit. The 20k is for GET requests
> >>>> however
> >>>> > POST request have their own limits.
>
> >>>> > Abraham
>
> >>>> > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 03:07, srikanth reddy <
> >>>> srikanth.yara...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >>>> > > Hi
> >>>> > > I am also looking for this. The following post says there is no
> >>>> limit on
> >>>> > > calls from application
>
> >>>> > >http://tweetdeck.posterous.com/what-does-rate-limit-exceeded
>
> >>>> > > Rate limit is applicable on Get methods from ip/client.
> >>>> > > Can someone confirm if one can make unlimited calls (from an app) to
> >>>> get
> >>>> > > request token? What is this 20000 limit? Is it for GET calls for
> >>>> authorized
> >>>> > > client/ip
>
> >>>> > > Regards
> >>>> > > Srikanth
>
> >>>> > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 1:24 PM, sjespers <se...@webkitchen.be>
> >>>> wrote:
>
> >>>> > >> Hi there,
>
> >>>> > >> I am a little bit confused by the API limits.
>
> >>>> > >> The server for my application is whitelisted. So it's limit is
> >>>> 20000
> >>>> > >> API hits.
> >>>> > >> I use oAuth to authorize Twitter users.
> >>>> > >> When I check an oAuth'd user's rate limit, he also seems gets 20000
> >>>> > >> API hits. Is that true?
>
> >>>> > >> Also, when I call the Twitter API using the user's oAuth
> >>>> credentials,
> >>>> > >> which API limit gets that hit? The user's? Or the server's?
>
> >>>> > >> Thanks,
> >>>> > >> Serge
>
> >>>> > --
> >>>> > Abraham Williams | Community Evangelist |http://web608.org
> >>>> > Hacker |http://abrah.am|http://twitter.com/abraham
> >>>> > Project |http://fireeagle.labs.poseurtech.com
> >>>> > This email is: [ ] blogable [x] ask first [ ] private.
> >>>> > Sent from Madison, WI, United States
>
> >>> --
> >>> Abraham Williams | Community Evangelist |http://web608.org
> >>> Hacker |http://abrah.am|http://twitter.com/abraham
> >>> Project |http://fireeagle.labs.poseurtech.com
> >>> This email is: [ ] blogable [x] ask first [ ] private.
> >>> Sent from Madison, WI, United States
>
> > --
> > Abraham Williams | Community Evangelist |http://web608.org
> > Hacker |http://abrah.am|http://twitter.com/abraham
> > Project |http://fireeagle.labs.poseurtech.com
> > This email is: [ ] blogable [x] ask first [ ] private.
> > Sent from Madison, WI, United States

Reply via email to