- From: <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 11:57:14 -0400
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
The lock can expire for the principle owning the lock, not the lock token. This implies a principle can't own multiple locks on the same resource which is already the case. John Stracke <francis@ecal.com> on 10/18/99 11:26:39 AM To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org cc: Subject: Re: Simplifying RFC-2518 Locking: A proposal jamsden@us.ibm.com wrote: > I suspect most clients would work just fine if the server returned a > constant for the lock token for compatibility purposes. What do others think? Constant lock tokens have the problem that they can't expire. -- /==============================================================\ |John Stracke | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.| |Chief Scientist |=============================================| |eCal Corp. |The plural of mongoose is polygoose. | |francis@ecal.com| | \==============================================================/
Received on Monday, 18 October 1999 11:59:52 UTC