W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 1999

Re: State-Lock [was Re: Proposal: BIND method]

From: John Stracke <francis@ecal.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999 17:34:50 +0000
Message-ID: <370E3A3A.70908A23@ecal.com>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
"Geoffrey M. Clemm" wrote:

> I believe the answer is "not terrible at all".  If so, I assume the
> answer is "do it as a header to LOCK" ?

Right.  That way, an uplevel client getting to a downlevel server will get some of the
desired functionality instead of getting rejected with "method not implemented".

--
/=============================================================\
|John Stracke    | My opinions are my own | S/MIME & HTML OK  |
|francis@ecal.com|============================================|
|Chief Scientist | NT's lack of reliability is only surpassed |
|eCal Corp.      |  by its lack of scalability. -- John Kirch |
\=============================================================/
Received on Friday, 9 April 1999 13:32:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:49 GMT