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

Re: Review of draft-ietf-webdav-quota-02.txt

From: Brian Korver <briank@xythos.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:44:48 -0600
Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-Id: <7549AD86-1609-11D8-B03D-000393751598@xythos.com>

On Thursday, November 13, 2003, at 08:51  AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Brian Korver wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, November 13, 2003, at 03:08  AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> Then please explain how the latest draft adresses the issue. Also 
>>> explain why mixing physical disk limits and quota is ok, although it 
>>> creates confusing behaviour *and* is incompatible with NFS.
>>>
>>> Julian
>> Simple, we went with NFS's model rather than quota-limit.  So, if it's
>> still confusing to you, then blame NFS.
>> I didn't realize that compatibility with NFS was one of WebDAV's
>> requirements.  ;-)
>
> Brian,
>
> as far as I can tell, there's nothing confusing with what NFS says. 
> The confusion arises because the quote spec
>
> - marshalls disk limits and quota using the same mechanism (contrary 
> to NFS) and
> - the quota spec introduces a new property for authoring quota.
>
> Why doesn't the quota spec just *copy* the relevant parts of NFS (all 
> we  need to is map four property names)?
>
> Julian

Julian,

The quota draft does differ from NFS, but that property alone
shouldn't mean that the quota draft is confusing.  Perhaps
you could state what you find confusing about the current
draft (and please, use the current draft, because this stuff
has changed).

-brian
briank@xythos.com
Received on Thursday, 13 November 2003 13:44:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:05 GMT