Re: WebDAV sync report w/invalid sync token

Hmm.  Not having a normative reference to RFC 3253 might be an=20
oversight.  Without the draft explicitly stating that 409 should be used=20
for an invalid sync-token or having an example showing as much, RFC 3253=20
is the only way for implementers to know what response code is applicable.


Werner Donn=E9 wrote:
> Hi Ken,
>=20
> Your conclusion is correct, because the draft uses the REPORT method,=20
> which is specified in RFC 3253. However, the draft doesn't refer to thi=
s=20
> RFC. This would probably be difficult, because synchronization is=20
> supposed to work as well for servers and clients that don't implement=20
> RFC 3253. Some day the generic stuff in RFC 3253 should move to a=20
> separate RFC or perhaps RFC 4918.
>=20
> Best regards,
>=20
> Werner.
>=20
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Ken Murchison <[email protected]=20
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>=20
>     Folks,
>=20
>     What is the proper response code for a sync-collection report if th=
e
>     sync-token is either invalid or out of date?  The I-D doesn't seem
>     to specify, so looking at RFC 3253 section 1.6 it appears that 403
>     and 409 are the two options for a precondition failure, with 409
>     presumably being the correct choice in this case.  Am I missing
>     something?
>=20
>     Thanks,
>     Ken
>=20
>     --=20
>     Kenneth Murchison
>     Principal Systems Software Engineer
>     Carnegie Mellon University
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> http://www.pincette.biz/
> Handling your documents with care, wherever you are.
>=20


--=20
Kenneth Murchison
Principal Systems Software Engineer
Carnegie Mellon University