- From: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 22:28:15 -0400
- To: " webdav" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OF191B5874.82524F21-ON85256D95.000CEAFA-85256D95.000D9281@us.ibm.com>
Peter wrote on 09/01/2003 06:55:15 AM:
> I am trying to figure out, how write locks should behave WRT binding.
> Take the following scenario:
> - a collection C11
> - a collection C1 containing a binding "foo" to C11 and mapped to URI
"u1"
> - a resource R2
> - a collection C2 containing a binding "b" to R2 and mapped to URI "u2"
> u1|
> C1
> foo| |u2
> C11 C2
> |b
> R2
> Now the following requests are issued (' marks locked resources):
> - LOCK /u1 (write, exclusive, depth=infinity)
> --> C11 is automatically added to the write-lock
> - PUT /u1/foo/a (passing locktoken)
> --> creates R1 which is added to the write-lock (RFC2518, Section 7.5)
> - BIND /u1/foo (b->/u2/b, passing locktoken)
> --> R2 is added to the write-lock (RFC2518, Section 7.5)
> u1|
> C1'
> foo| |u2
> C11' C2
> a| b\ |b
> R1' R2'
> - REBIND /u2 (a->/u1/foo/a, passing locktoken)
> --> R1 is removed from the write-lock (RFC2518, Section 7.7)
> u1|
> C1'
> foo| |u2
> C11' C2
> b\ |b \a
> R2' R1
> The described behavior for BIND and REBIND is what I suppose it
> should be. Is it correct?
Yes.
> BTW, what happens if, afterwards, the following UNLOCK on R2 is issued:
> - UNLOCK /u1/foo/b (passing locktoken)
> --> a) request is rejected, UNLOCK must be issued of C1 (/u1)
> or
> --> b) all associated resources (C1, C11, R2) are unlocked
> (RFC2518, Section 8.10.4)
Several of us have strongly advocated (a), to avoid a client mistakenly
unlocking a whole tree of resources when they intended to unlock a
single resource. I don't believe this has been resolved though.
> I suppose, that it is not possible to remove single resources from
> the write-lock by means of UNLOCK, isn't it?
That is correct, it is not possible.
> P.S.:
> At http://www.webdav.org/specs/ I found a link to http://ftp.ics.
> uci.edu/pub/ietf/webdav/collection/bind-issues.html, which contains
> the following entry:
> "ID: 41
> Source: Reuter/Hunt
> Description: Specify how BIND interacts with a write lock.
> Status: Closed
> Resolution: Declined
> Locking semantics is in too confused a state currently to
> be able to make any reliable statements. Don't want to hold
> up binding spec till lock settles down."
> Is that still prevailing?
No, that is an obsolete document, and it (and any links to it) should
be removed. The current bind issues document is:
http://www.webdav.org/bind/bind-issues-list.htm
Cheers,
Geoff
Received on Monday, 1 September 2003 22:28:30 UTC