Last Call comment on Etag requirements in draft-dusseault-caldav-12

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

I note that draft 12 of caldav still makes requirements that are potentially incompatible with HTTP:

Quoting <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-dusseault-caldav-12.html#rfc.section.5.3.4.p.4>:

"In the case where the data stored by a server as a result of a PUT request is not equivalent by octet equality to the submitted calendar object resource, the behavior of the ETag response header is undefined, with the exception that a strong entity tag MUST NOT be returned in the response. As a result, clients may need to retrieve the modified calendar object resource (and ETag) as a basis for further changes, rather than use the calendar object resource it had sent with the PUT request."

This is a requirement that is not in RFC2616. Adding this to CalDav may make it impossible to implement resources that are both compliant to CalDav and other HTTP based specifications (which may have a different opinion about ETags in PUT responses).

If CalDav clients *really* require knowledge about this situation, please define it in a way that will not potentially be in conflict with other specifications, such as by adding a *new* response header, indicating that content was not rewritten (as proposed in <http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/ietf-caldav/2006-April/000787.html> two weeks ago).

Best regards, Julian


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]