Re: [Ietf-caldav] Last Call comment on Etag requirements in draft-dusseault-caldav-12

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

 




On Jun 20, 2006, at 9:56 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

Lisa Dusseault schrieb:
Xythos WFC and Chandler (the Zanshin library that does WebDAV in python) behave this way and make the assumption I describe. How else would you expect a caching or synching client to behave after doing a PUT, when the implementors of those clients were pretty sure that WebDAV servers stored the content without mucking with it?

Chandler is not released and obviously operating based on what the CalDAV spec currently says.

Regarding the Xythos client: I just did some tests, and as far as I can tell the behavior is the same independantly of whether the server returns an ETag in PUT: the client always assumes that content was not rewritten, and in the absence of an ETag uses the Last-Modified date to check. So it seems that it doesn't handle content-rewriting servers at all, right? (one needs to manually purge the cache to get the actual content).

My assertion was that if a strong ETag is returned, Xythos WFC assumes that what it PUT was what the server stored, and it seems you agree. You found that if a Last-Modified is returned instead, WFC makes the same assumption -- naturally, they're very similar.

You're probably quite right about the general case, that existing WebDAV clients don't handle content-rewriting servers at all. What's the best thing a content-rewriting server can do in this situation? I would hope that if a client receives neither an ETag nor a Last- Modified in a PUT response, then the next time it synchronizes and sees an ETag that it's never seen before, the client downloads the resource. This allows the content to eventually get synchronized although perhaps not as fast as would be ideal.

But CalDAV clients will have to handle content-rewriting servers at least handling events (calendar component resources), because during protocol development we heard from a couple server developers that they'd need to add custom iCalendar properties to an event as soon as it was stored, thus rewriting the content.

lisa

_______________________________________________

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]