W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-01.txt

From: Jim Luther <luther.j@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 08:14:55 -0800
To: WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-Id: <EAB93322-5EDC-11D7-96DF-0003934B6A22@apple.com>


On Tuesday, March 25, 2003, at 08:05  AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

>> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
>> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Jim Luther
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 4:46 PM
>> To: WebDAV
>> Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-01.txt
>>
>>
>> On Monday, March 24, 2003, at 07:53  PM, Clemm, Geoff wrote:
>>
>>> Just for interests sake, is there any client that acts significantly
>>> differently if it were to receive a 4xx response instead of a 5xx
>>> response?  If not, this question is merely an aesthetic quibble (:-).
>>
>> Yes there is a client that handles those responses quite differently.
>>
>> The Mac OS X WebDAV file system client translates 507 to ENOSPC (No
>> space left on device) which is interpreted by most Macintosh
>> applications to mean the device is full; the WebDAV file system
>> translates 413 as a generic 4xx response to EINVAL (Invalid argument)
>> which is interpreted by most Macintosh applications to mean "something
>> wasn't right - who knows what?"
>>
>> The Mac OS X WebDAV file system client is one of the few clients
>> actually using quotas today and has been for over 1-1/2 years now.
>
> Well.
>
> Quota exceeded isn't the same thing as disk space exceeded. Wouldn't 
> it be
> more useful if the protocol would allow you to distinguish between 
> ENOSPC
> and EDQUOT?
>
> Julian

I was just answering the question "is there any client that acts 
significantly differently if it were to receive a 4xx response instead 
of a 5xx response?" The short answer is "yes."

However, the quota properties our client uses today have different 
property names than the properties in draft-ietf-webdav-quota-01.txt, 
so when things are nailed down, I'll have to change our code to use the 
new property names. When I do that, I can change the way status codes 
are handled if needed.

- Jim
Received on Tuesday, 25 March 2003 11:15:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:03 GMT