W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > July to September 2001


From: Keith Wannamaker <Keith@Wannamaker.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 11:10:22 -0400
To: <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
| -----Original Message-----
|    It is real lock-null
|    behavior (which is not implemented by IIS) which is the problem.

Well, IIS 5 & 6 also do not support depth infinity locks.
In addition, neither implement tagged-list preconditions correctly.
At the interop event, Exchange 2000 was even giving me 424 responses
to HEAD requests.

The point is, of course, there are plenty of other servers that have
implemented locknull correctly and fully.  You're throwing away a 
tremendous amount of work away if you pull it from the spec.

The other reason I disagree with dropping it is that there had to
be a reason that lock-null was chosen as the solution to the
lost update problem rather than the alternatives you suggest.
Perhaps someone else can speak to this, as I imagine this road
has already been traveled.

Received on Tuesday, 24 July 2001 12:13:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:23 UTC