W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2005

Re: Summary of ETag related issues in RFC2518bis

From: Wilfredo Sánchez Vega <wsanchez@wsanchez.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 18:57:34 -0800
Message-Id: <8141A98D-4D61-4308-A95C-F930A56ED5E6@wsanchez.net>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, WebDav WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
To: Jim Whitehead <ejw@soe.ucsc.edu>

   OK, I follow.

   The question then is how one would implement than on a server  
using a filesystem as the backing store, which is a *very* common  
case (Apache).  The information have from the filesystem doesn't seem  
to give us enough data without doing something like checksumming the  
file.  The performance implications of that solution are rather drastic.

   Absent a workable solution, we're going to be moving Apache into  
the non-compliant category if this is a MUST-level requirement.


On Dec 19, 2005, at 6:16 PM, Jim Whitehead wrote:

> If I'm a client that has an exclusive write lock, then if I PUT to  
> that resource, the stored entity should not be modified by anyone  
> other than the server. In this case, which is the most common one  
> for DAV-based editing, it's still very useful for the client to  
> receive the final etag value in the response to PUT. Why? It saves  
> the client from having to poll an uncertain number of times before  
> it receives the final, stable etag value.
> I still feel that R2 is required.
Received on Tuesday, 20 December 2005 02:59:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:34 UTC