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


From: Jason Crawford <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 01:15:30 -0400
To: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@Rational.Com>
Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
Message-ID: <OFA2BBE4E8.AE66F749-ON85256AA8.001C9BCB@pok.ibm.com>

Sounds good to me Geoff.   Do we have any other comments?  Agreement?


I'd just delete the paragraph in 9.8 that states:

   The timeout counter SHOULD be restarted any time an owner of the lock
   sends a method to any member of the lock, including unsupported
   methods, or methods which are unsuccessful.  However the lock MUST be
   refreshed if a refresh LOCK method is successfully received.

The last sentence is redundant, since it is already specified in the
LOCK semantics.

Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2001 10:20:46 UTC

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