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

RE: IETF meeting: Refreshing locks

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 18:53:42 -0500
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B105E4DA73@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
The paragraph referred to was in section 9.8:

   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.

Unfortunately, I cannot remember the rationale for removing this
paragraph, although it might have been that servers aren't actually
doing this in practice?

Cheers,
Geoff

-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Crawford [mailto:ccjason@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 7:01 PM
To: Julian Reschke
Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Subject: IETF meeting: Refreshing locks



What does the following text from the SLC IETF meaning mean?

> Refreshing Locks....
>
> Consensus was to delete paragraph on lock refresh.
> Eric - clients seem to be expecting locks to hang around, when they
expire it causes problems.


------------------------------------------
Phone: 914-784-7569,   ccjason@us.ibm.com
Received on Saturday, 23 February 2002 18:54:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:59 GMT