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

RE: extending the DAV: HTTP header, was: Issues from Interop/Inte rim WG Meeting

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 20:16:00 +0200
To: "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com>, "'Clemm, Geoff'" <gclemm@rational.com>, "'Webdav WG'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCGEOAFFAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

Lisa,

I think the answer to this is that this change should be discussed *after*
there's a consensus about the new header. If, as you say, the introduction
of the new header requires a new conformance class, that's (to me) a strong
indication that it doesn't belong into RFC2518bis.

Julian

--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 7:40 PM
> To: 'Clemm, Geoff'; 'Webdav WG'
> Subject: RE: extending the DAV: HTTP header, was: Issues from
> Interop/Inte rim WG Meeting
>
>
>
> A new compliance class was suggested at the WG meeting particularly so
> that clients could rely on Ilya's solution to ask the server to return a
> 401 so they could force authentication.  It would also be needed if we
> followed the current proposal for provision of lock tokens, to add a new
> header which does not cause the request to fail.
>
> The intention of the text draft is that a server could advertise
> compliance with 1 + bis, or with 1 + 2 + bis (or if it does not support
> bis, with 1 or with 1 + 2).
>
> Interoperability with old clients is very important and was always kept
> under consideration at the WG meeting.  Changes that add new headers,
> without deleting old headers or otherwise making old syntax illegal,
> continue to allow servers to interoperate with old clients.
>
> Consensus was quite clear at the WG meeting on both these issues.  I
> report this to the list to make it clear that significant dissent on the
> list, along with feasible alternative solutions to the problems
> encountered, would be required to overturn that.
>
> Lisa
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]
> > On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 6:50 AM
> > To: Webdav WG
> > Subject: RE: extending the DAV: HTTP header, was: Issues from
> Interop/Inte
> > rim WG Meeting
> >
> >
> > I agree with both of Julian's points.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Geoff
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 4:51 AM
> > To: Lisa Dusseault; Webdav WG
> > Subject: extending the DAV: HTTP header, was: Issues from
> > Interop/Interim WG Meeting
> >
> >
> >
> > > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> > > Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2002 8:14 PM
> > > To: Webdav WG
> > > Subject: Issues from Interop/Interim WG Meeting
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > - Add a new string in DAV: header to advertise support for RFC2518
> bis
> > >
> > > - Change the DAV: header BNF to allow coded URLs syntactically.
> > >
> > > ...
> >
> > Questions:
> >
> > 1) I thought that the goal for RFC2518bis is to clarify and to simply
> the
> > protocol, not to extend it. Why do we need a new compliance class
> then?
> > And
> > what does it mean for an existing server? For instance, if the server
> only
> > implements the "simplified" form of LOCK-NULL resources, is it allowed
> to
> > advertise compliance class "2". IMHO, it should (otherwise
> > interoperability
> > with old clients may break), so why a new class then?
> >
> > 2) If the spec extends how compliance classes are defined, I'd like to
> see
> > a
> > use case first. Note that advertising support for a specific live
> property
> > IMHO is not a valid use case, so servers doing this should be fixed
> > (there's
> > a better way to do it, which is adding the property to the set
> reported in
> > DAV:supported-live-property-set as defined in RFC3253).
> >
> > Julian
> >
> > --
> > <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
>
Received on Tuesday, 17 September 2002 14:25:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:01 GMT