- From: Adrien W. de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2013 23:20:42 +0000
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Cc: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
------ Original Message ------ From: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de> To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com> Cc: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> Sent: 2/07/2013 8:09:18 a.m. Subject: Re: #487 Resubmission of 403 >On 2013-07-01 19:36, Roy T. Fielding wrote: >> >>On Jun 30, 2013, at 9:17 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> >>>On 2013-06-20 17:54, Julian Reschke wrote: >>>> >>>>"If authentication credentials were provided in the request, the >>>>server >>>>considers them insufficient to grant access." >>>> >>>>This implies that *if* credentials have been provided, and the >>>>result is >>>>403, it's due to the credentials. >> >>No, it does not. Such a conclusion is not supportable by logic or >>English, and certainly not in programming languages, so I see no >>reason for a change here. Read the entire paragraph. > > ... > >I did, and I still think it's misleading. Again: If it helps, the way I read it is that the clause doesn't try to provide any insight into how the client may determine if the problem is a credential one or not, except by referring to the payload of the 403. * since it's a 403, the server wasn't prepared to grant access * if it had creds, and yet still got a 403 response, therefore the creds were not enough to change the server's mind * therefore the client shouldn't just try reusing the same creds, since they were insufficient * the client has the option to try with different creds * even new creds may not work, since it may not even be a credential issue The "new or different" is a bit of a distraction IMO. New = different. So it should just be "The client MAY repeat the request with different credentials" Adrien > >"If authentication credentials were provided in the request, the server >considers them insufficient to grant access. The client SHOULD NOT >repeat the request with the same credentials. The client MAY repeat the >request with new or different credentials. However, a request might be >forbidden for reasons unrelated to the credentials." > >So how does the client find out whether the credentials or something >else caused the problem? In the first case, we say it SHOULD NOT repeat >the request with the same credentials, in the second case we leave it >somehow open. > >Best regards, Julian > > >
Received on Monday, 1 July 2013 23:21:15 UTC