- From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 09:39:22 -0500
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
So long as the integrity check is optional, that would be fine... it just won't work with some patch formats (e.g. JSON Merge Patch [1] ). [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-json-merge-patch-07 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11 September 2014 07:16, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote: >> At the very least, if we do this, some kind of integrity check (ie: >> a MD5 checksum or similar) should be included in the scheme, so >> that the client can check that the patch operation gave the right >> result. > > Yes. ETag doesn't cut it for this. >
Received on Friday, 12 September 2014 14:40:11 UTC