- From: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 22:28:15 -0400
- To: " webdav" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OF191B5874.82524F21-ON85256D95.000CEAFA-85256D95.000D9281@us.ibm.com>
Peter wrote on 09/01/2003 06:55:15 AM: > I am trying to figure out, how write locks should behave WRT binding. > Take the following scenario: > - a collection C11 > - a collection C1 containing a binding "foo" to C11 and mapped to URI "u1" > - a resource R2 > - a collection C2 containing a binding "b" to R2 and mapped to URI "u2" > u1| > C1 > foo| |u2 > C11 C2 > |b > R2 > Now the following requests are issued (' marks locked resources): > - LOCK /u1 (write, exclusive, depth=infinity) > --> C11 is automatically added to the write-lock > - PUT /u1/foo/a (passing locktoken) > --> creates R1 which is added to the write-lock (RFC2518, Section 7.5) > - BIND /u1/foo (b->/u2/b, passing locktoken) > --> R2 is added to the write-lock (RFC2518, Section 7.5) > u1| > C1' > foo| |u2 > C11' C2 > a| b\ |b > R1' R2' > - REBIND /u2 (a->/u1/foo/a, passing locktoken) > --> R1 is removed from the write-lock (RFC2518, Section 7.7) > u1| > C1' > foo| |u2 > C11' C2 > b\ |b \a > R2' R1 > The described behavior for BIND and REBIND is what I suppose it > should be. Is it correct? Yes. > BTW, what happens if, afterwards, the following UNLOCK on R2 is issued: > - UNLOCK /u1/foo/b (passing locktoken) > --> a) request is rejected, UNLOCK must be issued of C1 (/u1) > or > --> b) all associated resources (C1, C11, R2) are unlocked > (RFC2518, Section 8.10.4) Several of us have strongly advocated (a), to avoid a client mistakenly unlocking a whole tree of resources when they intended to unlock a single resource. I don't believe this has been resolved though. > I suppose, that it is not possible to remove single resources from > the write-lock by means of UNLOCK, isn't it? That is correct, it is not possible. > P.S.: > At http://www.webdav.org/specs/ I found a link to http://ftp.ics. > uci.edu/pub/ietf/webdav/collection/bind-issues.html, which contains > the following entry: > "ID: 41 > Source: Reuter/Hunt > Description: Specify how BIND interacts with a write lock. > Status: Closed > Resolution: Declined > Locking semantics is in too confused a state currently to > be able to make any reliable statements. Don't want to hold > up binding spec till lock settles down." > Is that still prevailing? No, that is an obsolete document, and it (and any links to it) should be removed. The current bind issues document is: http://www.webdav.org/bind/bind-issues-list.htm Cheers, Geoff
Received on Monday, 1 September 2003 22:28:30 UTC