- From: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
- Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 11:36:35 -0800
- To: "'W3C WebDAV Mailing List'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
This is DEEP_LOCK_ERROR_STATUS in the issues list: http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/webdav/protocol/issues.html Original note at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/1999AprJun/0196.html For reference: mod_dav returns a 207. Assuming the other resources are locked, those response elements indicate 423 (Locked), and the Request-URI has a 424 (Failed Dependency) attached to it. Cheers, -g On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 12:21:00PM -0500, Clemm, Geoff wrote: > My vote would be that a 409 is the correct status code, and > that 8.10.7 should be updated to reflect this. There will be > other reasons why you would get a 409 (perhaps access control > limitations), so this is just one of the reasons why you'd > get a 409. I'd only return 207 when a Depth operation effectively > caused the method to be applied independently to all the members > of the collection, and this is not the case for a LOCK request, > where a single lock-token is allocated (whose scope is the whole > collection). > > Cheers, > Geoff > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hall, Shaun [mailto:Shaun.Hall@gbr.xerox.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 4:31 AM > To: 'W3C WebDAV Mailing List' > Subject: RE: RFC2518 LOCK Response Code > > > Reposting as I've had no response to this. > > Am I correct in my assumption i.e. does the spec need updating? > > Regards > > Shaun Hall > Xerox Europe > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Hall, Shaun [mailto:Shaun.Hall@gbr.xerox.com] > > Sent: 23 November 2000 12:04 > > To: 'W3C WebDAV Mailing List' > > Subject: RFC2518 LOCK Response Code > > > > > > An issue regarding a LOCK response code in RFC2518. A quick > > search in the > > archives didn't show anything about this. > > > > In section 8.10.4, it states "If the lock cannot be granted to all > > resources, a 409 (Conflict) status code MUST be returned with > > a response > > entity body containing a multi-status XML element...". > > > > 1) The 409 status code is not listed in section 8.10.7 (LOCK > > status codes). > > 2) The example in section 8.10.10 (Multi-resource LOCK > > request which fails) > > returns a 207 (Multi-status) response code, not a 409. > > > > The 207 response is normal for WebDAV methods that need to provide > > information about multiple-resources. > > > > I'm inclined to think the 207 is the correct response in such > > a failure > > case, which at first implies the 409 is wrong. > > > > However, I think the only case where a 409 is applicable is > > if one it trying > > to "create" a Lock Null Resource (LNR) (i.e. the > > null-resource does not > > exist) and where the ancestors of the LNR do not exist. I > > think this would > > be consistent with other methods as well (e.g. PUT, COPY, MOVE). > > > > Comments/clarification/etc please. > > > > Regards > > > > Shaun Hall > > Xerox Europe > > -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Wednesday, 6 December 2000 14:33:38 UTC