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

[Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de>]

Lisa Dusseault schrieb:
> On Jun 15, 2006, at 9:32 AM, Wilfredo Sánchez Vega wrote:
>
> >   I agree with Julian.
> >
> >   As we've mentioned before, Apache returns a weak ETag on PUT, which 
> > turns into a strong ETag sometime later.  If clients rely on being 
> > able to use that ETag on a GET later, they won't work with Apache, and 
> > IIRC, Apache is pretty popular.
> >
> >   The ETag requirements in the draft are what many clients authors 
> > might *like* to be the common case, but it is most certainly not so 
> > today.
>
> It's worse than that; many client authors *assumed* that to be the case, 
> and implemented and deployed their clients assuming that if the client 
> receives a strong ETag in response to a PUT, it has no further work to 
> do to synchronize that resource.  So the deployed base says that *is* 
> the case today.  I don't feel our document makes this situation any 
> worse than the deployed base of clients already does.
>
> Lisa

Again: do you have any evidence of *shipping* clients making that 
assumption?

Best regards, Julian



_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf