- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:10:34 +0200
- To: Jeff Currier <Jeff.Currier@microsoft.com>
- CC: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Jeff Currier wrote: > > > Frank, > > > > I think a new status code would likely be the best move. We’re > attempting to enforce quota’s around bandwidth, storage used, and some > other application specific constraints. Moreover, I think the notion of > quota’s as they apply to new services seems like a something many new > services would use. > > > > We also found that WebDav introduced some that would kind of work. > Specifically, 507(InsufficientStorage) comes to mind however this really > isn’t completely sufficient for our use cases. Additionally, when I > think of the other scenarios that have come up issuing too many requests > within a specific period of time, etc it really doesn’t map very well > since there is a very specific meaning behind that status code. > ... See: <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc4331.html#rfc.section.6> BR, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 29 July 2008 22:11:17 UTC