![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
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.
Yes. I'm not sure how this is different from the generic case, though.
Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.