W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2002

RE: etags in If: headers (was: 54th IETF Meeting Information, and RFC2518 open issues)

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 07:33:46 -0400
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B10697A123@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: "Webdav WG (E-mail)" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
You don't need to put the Etag in the If header to get the consistency
check;
you can just use both the If header with the lock token and an If-Match
header with the Etag.

I really don't care whether or not we keep the Etag semantics in
the If header.  The issue was that if it is not being used in practice by
clients, then it needs to be deleted when we go to proposed standard,
unless there were good arguments for keeping it in (and no such good
argument seems to have yet been fielded).

Cheers,
Geoff

-----Original Message-----
From: Yves Lafon [mailto:ylafon@w3.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 10:23 PM
To: Clemm, Geoff
Cc: Webdav WG (E-mail)
Subject: RE: etags in If: headers (was: 54th IETF Meeting Information,
and RFC2518 open issues)


On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, Clemm, Geoff wrote:

> exceptional case like this (i.e. losing your lock).
>
> So until a use case is identified that cannot be easily handled by
> other machinery, I suggest we limit the If header to just lock tokens.

Well, using also ETag verification allows consistency check. If you still
have your lock and the ETag has changed, then it's because something nasty
happened on the server side (as the ETag represents more or less a version
tag of the resource).
As it won't cost anything, I don't understand why you want to remove a
consistency check.

-- 
Yves Lafon - W3C
Received on Friday, 26 April 2002 07:34:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:00 GMT