- From: Jim Amsden <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 09:05:22 -0400
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
Lisa says: With all these considerations, I do not think replication of properties is decently possible in RFC2518 without writing serious server and client protocol extensions. If these server and client protocol extensions are being done in order to do replication properly, then surely they will design something better than allprop anyway. DAV4J implements copy across servers by GET/PUT, PROPFIND/PROPPATCH. This seems like simple symmetry that the protocol should support. DAV4J does the properties by trying the PROPPATCH, getting the errors back, and filtering out the ones that didn't make it because they were live on the destination server. That is, simulating keepalive behavior. Live properties on the source server may be converted to dead properties on the destination. This seemed sensible enough in situations where servers support different live properties. The only thing that would make this simpler is if PROPPATCH supported keepalive like copy. This would eliminate the need to simulate it by the multiple round trips currently being made to copy the properties. I had proposed such an extension to PROPPATCH a while back.
Received on Sunday, 6 May 2001 09:09:57 UTC