![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
[[Concurrent modification: When a server receives multiple concurrent requests to modify a resource, those requests SHOULD be queued and processed in the order in which they are received. If a server is incapable of queuing concurrent requests, all subsequent requests SHOULD be rejected with a 409 (Conflict) until the first modification request is complete.
]]RFC2616 describes the above status code (409) but not in the context of a particular type of HTTP request. I fail to see why this draft has mandated specific error codes and specific server behavior in response to certain requests. It curtails server behavior without a good reason.
Nikunj On Oct 27, 2009, at 10:10 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
(FYI) The IESG wrote:The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the following document:- 'PATCH Method for HTTP ' <draft-dusseault-http-patch-15.txt> as a Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicitsfinal comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf at ietf.org mailing lists by 2009-11-24. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg at ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.The file can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-dusseault-http-patch-15.txt IESG discussion can be tracked via https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=11143&rfc_flag=0 _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.