[Ietf-caldav] Fwd: Summary of ETag related issues in RFC2518bis

[Lisa Dusseault]

That does suggest a way for Apache to avoid the within-second overwrite 
risk: to disallow PUT operations while there's a weak ETag.  That would 
be consistent with HTTP as far as I can see.  It would still, however, 
theoretically cause clients to reload the resource content when the 
server switches to the strong ETag.

lisa

On Dec 24, 2005, at 2:14 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Helge Hess wrote:
>> On 24. Dez 2005, at 01:31 Uhr, Mike Shaver wrote:
>>> On 12/22/05, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>> Apache simply has decided that multiple updates within one second 
>>>> *are*
>>>> semantically equivalent.
>>>
>>> Do you mean to indicate that such a decision on the part of Apache is
>>> reasonable, given the requirements of the HTTP specification?  It
>>> certainly doesn't seem that way to me, but I am probably the biggest
>>> HTTP dullard on this list, so I'm happy to learn.
>> Maybe I'm wrong but if I understood Julian correctly Apache will 
>> ensure that there will be only one PUT in the timeframe of 1s. If the 
>> server ensures that, a timestamp with 1s granularity should be enough 
>> for an etag?
>
> No, that's not what I intended to say. As far as I know, it currently 
> allows multiple PUTs.
>
> Best regards, Julian
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-caldav mailing list -- Ietf-caldav at osafoundation.org
> See http://ietf.webdav.org/caldav/ for more CalDAV resources
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-caldav