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

Re: locknull resources

From: <marjorie@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 19:13:05 -0500
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Message-ID: <8525682B.00016A26.00@d54mta04.raleigh.ibm.com>

This isn't perhaps that unexpected. If one models the lifecycle of a
resource as a finite state machine, then it goes from non-existant (i.e., a
reference to resource whose current state is undefined) to lock-null on
LOCK. More locks leave it in this state. It only leaves this state and goes
back to non-existant if there are no more locks. A PUT moves it from the
lock-null state to the existing-resource state, etc.

Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org> on 11/11/99 07:58:06 PM

To:   w3c-dist-auth@w3.org

Subject:  locknull resources

Given the *current* spec :-), has anybody noticed that you can actually
have a locknull resource that does not have any *direct* locks on it? For

  Establish a locknull as /a/b with a shared lock. Now, lock /a with a
  Depth: infinity lock, shared. Finally, unlock /a/b with the first

Just wanted to mention this to others, as it was pretty unexpected for


Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Monday, 15 November 1999 19:15:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:19 UTC