- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 22:46:37 -0700
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Ken Murchison <murch@andrew.cmu.edu>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Oct 13, 2012, at 11:40 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > Actually, I don't think you need Preference-Applied *or* Vary to indicate this; both are barking up the wrong tree. > > Rather, you need something with the specific semantics "the representation of the resource is byte-equivalent to the PUT request you just made" for *that* case. > > This could be a new status code, or it could be a header on the response. It could even be a "duplicate" link relation (RFC6249), pointing to a URI for "the request you just made"; e.g. There is nothing to guarantee that the PUT payload received by the origin server is byte-equivalent to the payload sent by the user agent, so it does little good for the origin to say that it received what "you" sent and didn't change it. A more interoperable protocol would be for the request message to contain some sort of end-to-end hash or signature of the request representation, and the server to respond with the same hash applied to the new representation. ....Roy
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2012 05:47:11 UTC