W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: WGLC draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-12

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:52:56 +0200
Message-ID: <42B1D898.9080105@gmx.de>
To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
CC: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>, webdav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>

Lisa Dusseault wrote:
> Are there any other Web or WebDAV servers that allow redirects to be 
> authored over any kind of protocol or service? The only things I'm aware 
> of already:
> - Joe's hack which is a client-to-client communication that is ignored 
> by the server, so unlikely to be replaced by server logic
> - Web server configuration done by administrators, which isn't really 
> itself a protocol or service although there might be something like SSH 
> or FTP involved, also unlikely to be replaced because it's what 
> administrators do for many other chores as well (and because REDIRECT 
> may not solve the entire need)
> If there are other approaches, I'm unaware of them, and it would help to 
> know. But if these are the only cases than I have a different evaluation 
> of whether implementors will change current mechanisms.


I don't think it's relevant whether implementors will *change* current 
mechanisms. Why would they? The question is whether there's a use case 
for a HTTP-client driven mechanism, which could be implemented *in 
addition* to what the server already does.

Looking at Apache/moddav, it seems that MKREDIRECT and UPDATEREDIRECT 
could be implemented in mod_alias (adding and updating entries in 
.htaccess, for example).

It's a bit unclear to me what exactly your point is. Yes, server admins 
can already author redirects, so there are other ways to create these 
redirects than HTTP. The same could be said about WebDAV, so why did we 
bother defining that?

Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 16 June 2005 19:53:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:34 UTC