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

Re: Binding loops and PROPFIND clarification needed (was Re: COPY and bindings)

From: Chris Knight <Christopher.D.Knight@nasa.gov>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 15:06:19 -0700
Message-ID: <3F0F34DB.80809@nasa.gov>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
CC: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org

Julian Reschke wrote:

>you are right that this probably should be explained a bit better.
First/easiest thing would be to change the example to have the 506 
followed by a 200. (The example implied to me that processing stopped at 
the first 506.)

>My p.o.v. (which seems to be compatible with the example) is that the 506
>should be reported once the depth:infinity processing encounters a resource
>that already has been traversed/reported. So, in your example, you'd report
>a 506 for "/A/B/C" -- note that you can't report the same resource twice.
>It's also correct that this means that a client that wants to replicate
>bindings will need an additional PROPFIND against "/A/B/C" to get the
Fair enough. In environments where the may be many many loops, following 
up with multiple PROPFIND requests might be time consuming. Is it 
expected that Delta-V environments (particularly with some of the 
advanced features) might have (many) loops? (Elias implied that bindings 
are prettymuch necessary and I think I remember him saying that loops 
are necessary as well.)

>However, this *only* applies to depth:infinity processing, which is sort of
>deprecated anyway (meaning servers are allowed to reject these requests, and
>I think moddav does this by default).
Yes, mod_dav does reject Depth: infinity propfinds by default. I am 
working on a server that has a client that very much prefers to use 
Depth: infinity but perhaps I'll just respond with the first case (a 506 
response) and make him do Depth: 1 whenever there're loops.

>So my understanding is that a "modern" client would only do depth:1
>PROPFINDs, and thus never see a 506.
:^> Being a server developer, I would love to see Depth: infinity 
disappear...But I'm sure client developers would say the opposite.
Received on Friday, 11 July 2003 18:05:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:28 UTC