- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:03:45 -0800
- To: "'Helge Hess'" <helge.hess@opengroupware.org>, "'Geoffrey M Clemm'" <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "'Webdav WG'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
> code which signals the client why it couldn't perform the operation > would be quite useful (something like out-of-the-namespace-I-process). > With the Forbidden code we do not know whether the request > was rejected > because of access restrictions or just because it is located on a > different server, right? > > Note that I'm assuming that a server is usually "dumb" and > will not try > to act as a proxy with regards to the other namespace (if it > does we do > have the 502 code to detect errors, if I remember right). > I thought the 502 Bad Gateway error was appropriate whenever it's another server, another namespace, or another domain that can't be copied to. It's a fuzzy continuum, after all: - One physical machine may be able to copy to another physical machine if they're in the same security domain and the software supports it. Thus, docs1.example.com and docs2.example.com might allow MOVE between them. If not, however, 502 Bad Gateway is appropriate. - Two domains might be hosted on the same physical machine. Thus if docs.bettysbagels.com and docs.joesjava.com are both hosted by the same service provider using the same server software, using virtual servers, a MOVE between them might be allowed. If it's not allowed, however, 502 Bad Gateway is appropriate. - Within one domain, two top-level directories might actually be mounted from different locations (different file storage servers?), and *not* allow move between. E.g. docs.example.com/nfs-mount1 and docs.example.com/cifs-mount8 might not support MOVE between them. I think this sufficiently meets the definition of "gateway" to make 502 Bad Gateway is still appropriate. Lisa
Received on Tuesday, 25 November 2003 13:03:49 UTC