http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4 ejw@cs.ucsc.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|WORKSFORME | ------- Additional Comments From ejw@cs.ucsc.edu 2004-12-03 10:32 ------- I agree with Lisa that the access control implications of REBIND should be made explicit. My suggestion is to add the following language to Section 6. Change: "It is effectively an atomic form of a MOVE request." To: "It is effectively an atomic form of a MOVE request, and MUST be treated as a MOVE for the purpose of determining access permissions (see RFC 3744, Appendix B)." ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.Received on Friday, 3 December 2004 18:32:34 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:07 GMT