From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 1 14:51:53 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA08350 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 14:51:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSJV5-00025Q-Jh for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 18:49:07 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSJV4-00024o-Mr for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 18:49:06 +0000 Received: from mail.gmx.de ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by maggie.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSJV2-0006YP-JB for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 18:49:08 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 01 May 2005 18:49:00 -0000 Received: from p508FD364.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.0.4]) [80.143.211.100] by mail.gmx.net (mp021) with SMTP; 01 May 2005 20:49:00 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <42752494.7070309@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 20:48:52 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Received-SPF: pass (maggie.w3.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.20 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 13a3f8e880ee4fc4b5a2edd59ac5d0d6 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42752494.7070309@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9583 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 18:49:07 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brian, thanks for the fixes. I'm still unhappy about two minor details (discussed earlier), but on the other hand this draft is definitively ready for a working group last call (during which we can discuss these and make a decision). Lisa, Joe, please consider to start a WG last call (or alternatively, provide feedback on what's missing for that). Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 1 15:50:29 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA13259 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 15:50:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSKRS-0002sq-1Q for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 19:49:26 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSKRR-0002sB-77 for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 19:49:25 +0000 Received: from mail24.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.117.26]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSKRO-0006kK-SW for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 19:49:25 +0000 Received: (qmail 26905 invoked from network); 1 May 2005 19:49:21 -0000 Received: from dsl081-070-219.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO cse.ucsc.edu) (elias@[64.81.70.219]) (envelope-sender ) by mail24.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 1 May 2005 19:49:21 -0000 Message-ID: <427532BE.6040407@cse.ucsc.edu> Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 12:49:18 -0700 From: Elias Sinderson Reply-To: "'webdav'" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Windows/20040207) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Geoffrey M Clemm CC: Julian Reschke , "'webdav'" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: none (bart.w3.org: domain of elias@cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 912296465ddbf3ad13311f47a10f9946 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: Issue 71, Clarify what servers may and may not do with privileges when BIND is used (was: Moving forward on BIND) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/427532BE.6040407@cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9584 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 19:49:26 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Geoffrey M Clemm wrote: > I don't quite follow what you are suggesting here. [...] Sorry, I was being abstruse - I believe we should close this issue. After taking the time to review the relevant sections in the ACL and BIND specs, my conclusion is that the existing text is sufficient. Cheers, Elias From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 1 16:02:41 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA13741 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 16:02:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSKcn-0005Mn-WF for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:01:10 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSKcm-0005M9-1v for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:01:08 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSKci-0007xe-Kw for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:01:07 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j41K130V030843; Sun, 1 May 2005 13:01:03 -0700 Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 13:01:03 -0700 Message-Id: <200505012001.j41K130V030843@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (bart.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: c9c0d7dbefde4899cd070514a95b9cd0 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 5] Bindings and DeltaV aren't fully interspecified X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505012001.j41K130V030843@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9585 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 20:01:09 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 elias@cse.ucsc.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Product|WebDAV-BIND |WebDAV-RFC3253-bis Version|-07 |-latest ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 1 16:04:40 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA13848 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 16:04:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSKfX-0005Zt-2l for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:03:59 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSKfV-0005ZK-Jk for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:03:57 +0000 Received: from mail27.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.117.29]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSKfS-00009p-UJ for w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:03:57 +0000 Received: (qmail 12616 invoked from network); 1 May 2005 20:03:51 -0000 Received: from dsl081-070-219.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO cse.ucsc.edu) (elias@[64.81.70.219]) (envelope-sender ) by mail27.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 1 May 2005 20:03:51 -0000 Message-ID: <42753625.4020408@cse.ucsc.edu> Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:03:49 -0700 From: Elias Sinderson User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Windows/20040207) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Webdav WG References: <4270090D.40006@cse.ucsc.edu> In-Reply-To: <4270090D.40006@cse.ucsc.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: none (lisa.w3.org: domain of elias@cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: ccc99dce40041680e09d4488d98c4a0a X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: Issue 5, Bindings and DeltaV aren't fully interspecified (was: Moving forward on BIND) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42753625.4020408@cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9586 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 20:03:59 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Elias Sinderson wrote: > Geoffrey M Clemm wrote: > >> I agree with Elias. Multiple bindings are explicitly identified in >> DeltaV [...] if anything is unclear about this in RFC-3253, please >> submit this as a bug against RFC-3253, and I'll make sure it gets >> addressed in RFC-3253bis. > > I move to close Issue 5 as resolved, with no additional text being > required in the BIND specification. It is superfluous to mention what > the BIND spec doesn't address. Well, I guess I have the permissions to reassign issues in bugzilla (email forthcoming). ... Sorry if this breaks some process, but I honestly looked for some discussion of bugzilla process in the list archives and couldn't find any. Best, Elias From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 1 16:28:54 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA14930 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 16:28:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL2t-00010o-F4 for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:28:07 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL2k-00010D-7L for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:27:58 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL2h-0002YZ-0B for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:27:58 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j41KRrRD030881; Sun, 1 May 2005 13:27:53 -0700 Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 13:27:53 -0700 Message-Id: <200505012027.j41KRrRD030881@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (bart.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 480fd277b876ab2fd34ac54f365ced5f X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 2] Bindings needs to completely describe how bindings interact with locks. X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505012027.j41KRrRD030881@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9587 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 20:28:07 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2 ------- Additional Comments From elias@cse.ucsc.edu 2005-05-01 13:27 ------- "This issue appears to have been resolved, with clarifying text added to BIND. I move to close the bugzilla issue unless there is an objection." http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2005AprJun/0017.html ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 1 16:32:06 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA15095 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 16:32:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL65-0002rU-De for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:31:25 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL64-0002qo-RC for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:31:24 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL62-0002vL-Ca for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:31:24 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j41KVMEQ030908; Sun, 1 May 2005 13:31:22 -0700 Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 13:31:22 -0700 Message-Id: <200505012031.j41KVMEQ030908@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (bart.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: fa1abb7df4f901c9c86dd9dbbe31ca48 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 76] What event does creationdate refer to X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505012031.j41KVMEQ030908@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9588 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 20:31:25 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=76 ------- Additional Comments From elias@cse.ucsc.edu 2005-05-01 13:31 ------- "I have trouble taking Issue 76 [...] seriously; anyway I've replied to it and never heard back from the author, and no votes are on it." - Julian Reshke http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2005AprJun/0016.html "I have no objections to closing this issue, the intended bahavior seems perfectly clear from a reading of the two specs." - Elias Sinderson http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2005AprJun/0017.html ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 1 16:33:58 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA15279 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 16:33:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL7z-00034c-Bd for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:33:23 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL7y-00032Y-Nn for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:33:22 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL7w-00038P-EB for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:33:22 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j41KXJIn030927; Sun, 1 May 2005 13:33:19 -0700 Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 13:33:19 -0700 Message-Id: <200505012033.j41KXJIn030927@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (lisa.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 07110535fdb946490e2ab93633575712 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 77] Do Bind operations change the getlastmodified or getetag property values X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505012033.j41KXJIn030927@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9589 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 20:33:23 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77 ------- Additional Comments From elias@cse.ucsc.edu 2005-05-01 13:33 ------- "I am satisfied with the current resolution - if there are no objections, I would move that the existing language is sufficient and Issues 77 and 78 should be closed." http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2005AprJun/0017.html ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 1 16:34:10 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA15302 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 16:34:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL8F-0003Cb-GB for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:33:39 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL8E-0003C3-RC for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:33:38 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL8C-00007H-6W for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:33:40 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j41KXVRg030945; Sun, 1 May 2005 13:33:31 -0700 Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 13:33:31 -0700 Message-Id: <200505012033.j41KXVRg030945@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (maggie.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: e671edf409d75502a55000cc32e72390 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 78] Value of ETag and getlastmodified properties on multiple bindings X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505012033.j41KXVRg030945@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9590 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 20:33:39 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78 ------- Additional Comments From elias@cse.ucsc.edu 2005-05-01 13:33 ------- "I am satisfied with the current resolution - if there are no objections, I would move that the existing language is sufficient and Issues 77 and 78 should be closed." http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2005AprJun/0017.html ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 1 16:35:24 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA15492 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 16:35:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL9R-0003QF-5d for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:34:53 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL9Q-0003Ph-Af for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:34:52 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSL9N-0003KZ-Jk for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:34:52 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j41KYnQr030963; Sun, 1 May 2005 13:34:49 -0700 Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 13:34:49 -0700 Message-Id: <200505012034.j41KYnQr030963@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (lisa.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 1b43eec5854bf52b29da9507ea698782 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 71] Clarify what servers may and may not do with privileges when BIND is used X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505012034.j41KYnQr030963@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9591 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 20:34:53 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71 ------- Additional Comments From elias@cse.ucsc.edu 2005-05-01 13:34 ------- "I believe we should close this issue. After taking the time to review the relevant sections in the ACL and BIND specs, my conclusion is that the existing text is sufficient." http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2005AprJun/0029.html ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 1 16:38:03 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA15597 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 16:38:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSLBx-00043q-7A for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:37:29 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSLBv-00043C-7j for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:37:27 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSLBs-0003gG-UE for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 20:37:27 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j41KbOx3030987; Sun, 1 May 2005 13:37:24 -0700 Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 13:37:24 -0700 Message-Id: <200505012037.j41KbOx3030987@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (bart.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 3c32143b133f130f15853178e27e8c6f X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 5] Bindings and DeltaV aren't fully interspecified X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505012037.j41KbOx3030987@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9592 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 20:37:29 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 ------- Additional Comments From elias@cse.ucsc.edu 2005-05-01 13:37 ------- Issue reassigned in response to the following. "Multiple bindings are explicitly identified in DeltaV as something created when you have a version-controlled resource for a given version history as an immediate member of more than one collection in that workspace. Therefore, if anything is unclear about this in RFC-3253, please submit this as a bug against RFC-3253, and I'll make sure it gets addressed in RFC-3253bis." - Geoff Clemm http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2005AprJun/0022.html ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 1 17:06:16 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA16849 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 17:06:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSLcT-0001J7-FX for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 21:04:53 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSLcQ-0001IZ-Sy for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 21:04:51 +0000 Received: from mail22.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.117.24]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSLcN-000339-QK for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 21:04:52 +0000 Received: (qmail 12409 invoked from network); 1 May 2005 21:04:43 -0000 Received: from dsl081-070-219.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO cse.ucsc.edu) (elias@[64.81.70.219]) (envelope-sender ) by mail22.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 1 May 2005 21:04:42 -0000 Message-ID: <42754468.2040509@cse.ucsc.edu> Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 14:04:40 -0700 From: Elias Sinderson Reply-To: "'webdav'" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Windows/20040207) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "'webdav'" References: <200503172358.j2HNwt05017452@services.cse.ucsc.edu> <4251A2AE.7020101@gmx.de> <426B6F09.1050000@gmx.de> <426D5417.9000001@cse.ucsc.edu> <426EA194.6090304@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <426EA194.6090304@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: none (maggie.w3.org: domain of elias@cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: fd87a05a39e48826c4f50d289bb3ca09 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: Moving forward on BIND X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42754468.2040509@cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9593 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 21:04:53 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Julian Reschke wrote: > [...] most of the open Bugzilla issues should have been closed long ago. Having reviewed all of the open issues, relevant sections of BIND and related specs, I would like to summarize my position wrt BIND. The existing issues all seem to have been sufficiently addressed and there have been motions made for each to be closed (or reassigned, as in the case of issue 5). As such, and without hearing any dissenting oppinions in almost a week, BIND should properly move forward and be submitted to the IESG for another last call. > It's a shame that a new tracking system and last call procedure were > introduced, and then the WG doesn't stick to the process that was > agreed upon. Joe's last call process email, "WG Last Call on BIND" [1], states: - The issue opener may close the issue, if the vote count is still 0 - If the vote count is >0, only a working group chair or person designated by the chair may close the issue\ and - Issues that have 0 votes at the end of last call will be closed automatically Neglecting the fact that the last call ended almost exactly three months ago (!), and all but issues 2 and 71 should have been closed at the time... It would seem from Joes' process email that either the person who opened the issues or one of the WG chairs should now close the remaining issues. NB: When making the motion for issue 71 to be closed, I removed my vote for it - the only one at the time. If the issue openers won't close the issues that have no votes, I would request that the WG chairs close them (or designate some to do so on their behalf) within the week. Regarding Issue 2, the issue opener and only voter for the issue are the current WG chairs - might I request that they both promptly review the issue and associated commentary as well as the new text that was added to resolve the issue? Best, Elias [1] From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Mon May 2 13:53:28 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA09322 for ; Mon, 2 May 2005 13:53:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSf4J-0005NW-Ov for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 02 May 2005 17:50:55 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSf4I-0005Ms-4A for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 02 May 2005 17:50:54 +0000 Received: from gate.arc.nasa.gov ([128.102.102.51]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSf4E-0007vM-7o for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Mon, 02 May 2005 17:50:53 +0000 Received: from [143.232.67.216] (esinderson.arc.nasa.gov [143.232.67.216]) by gate.arc.nasa.gov ( -- Info omitted by ASANI Solutions, LLC.) with ESMTP id j42HomP15488 for ; Mon, 2 May 2005 10:50:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 10:50:48 -0700 From: Elias Sinderson Reply-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Macintosh/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: none (bart.w3.org: domain of elias@cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: e235341a88eead31644dbb790e3f3d10 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9594 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 17:50:55 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: >A New Internet-Draft is available [...] > > Having reviewed the latest quota draft, as well as pertinent mailing list discussions over the last six months, I concur with Julias assessment of the draft. That is, what few issues remain can be addressed during last call and I am supportive of initiating this process using the existing process that Joe suggested for the last call on BIND. I notice that there is no 'Product' entry for the quota spec in bugzilla - could we add this so that any remaining issues that are brought up may be tracked? Cheers, Elias From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Mon May 2 15:59:14 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA29374 for ; Mon, 2 May 2005 15:59:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DSh2t-0007ja-PY for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 02 May 2005 19:57:35 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSh2r-0007j2-FD for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 02 May 2005 19:57:33 +0000 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]) by bart.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DSh2m-0002wX-GC for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Mon, 02 May 2005 19:57:32 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 02 May 2005 19:57:26 -0000 Received: from p508FD721.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.0.4]) [80.143.215.33] by mail.gmx.net (mp023) with SMTP; 02 May 2005 21:57:26 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 21:57:21 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> In-Reply-To: <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Received-SPF: pass (bart.w3.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.20 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 877a207f49b83c123c9193acfa183a9d X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42768620.1040209@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9595 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 19:57:35 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Elias Sinderson wrote: > > Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: > >> A New Internet-Draft is available [...] >> >> > Having reviewed the latest quota draft, as well as pertinent mailing > list discussions over the last six months, I concur with Julias > assessment of the draft. That is, what few issues remain can be > addressed during last call and I am supportive of initiating this > process using the existing process that Joe suggested for the last call > on BIND. > > I notice that there is no 'Product' entry for the quota spec in bugzilla > - could we add this so that any remaining issues that are brought up may > be tracked? Yes. We can do that. Lisa, Brian, is one of you two volunteering to become the "initial owner" for these bugs? (Brian, do you already have an accoung over at ?) Best regards, Julian -- bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760 From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 4 15:49:50 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21967 for ; Wed, 4 May 2005 15:49:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DTPqU-00066X-BG for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 04 May 2005 19:47:46 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DTPqT-00065y-Gs for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 04 May 2005 19:47:45 +0000 Received: from pop.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by lisa.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DTPqN-0007Sf-Pq for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 04 May 2005 19:47:45 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 04 May 2005 19:47:36 -0000 Received: from p508FE082.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.0.3]) [80.143.224.130] by mail.gmx.net (mp015) with SMTP; 04 May 2005 21:47:36 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <427926D3.6030203@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 21:47:31 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joe Hildebrand CC: webdav References: <1aef7c87a3636e35da541fba00215c3c@jabber.com> In-Reply-To: <1aef7c87a3636e35da541fba00215c3c@jabber.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Received-SPF: pass (lisa.w3.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.20 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 9edb79f300c88dec2d04e069bedcda8b X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: Status of working group last call on BIND X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/427926D3.6030203@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9596 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 19:47:46 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Joe Hildebrand wrote: > > Please send a note to the list if you reviewed BIND for the last call. > I'd like to make sure we had enough eyes on it. > > If there are any outstanding issues that, for whatever reason, didn't > make it into Bugzilla, please enter them ASAP. I've seen a couple go by > on the list that I don't see in the system. > > Here is a list of the issues I see on bugzilla. > > --- > http://ietf.webdav.org:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2 > "Bindings needs to completely describe how bindings interact with > locks." > > I see consensus for the clarification text proposed and wordsmithed here > on the list. > > --- > http://ietf.webdav.org:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 > "Bindings and DeltaV aren't fully interspecified" > > Of the text I've seen for this, that says that the interaction is > unspecified, I don't see enough consensus on that suggestion to hold > things up. > > --- > http://ietf.webdav.org:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71 > "Clarify what servers may and may not do with privileges when BIND is > used" > > I don't see consensus for making a change. However, I want to make sure > I understand the issue before I predict how the IESG will react to this > during their last call. I'll post a message to the list with some > thoughts. Joe, could you please follow up on this by either actually closing the issues or giving us feedback on what you think is needed? Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 4 18:32:25 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA19110 for ; Wed, 4 May 2005 18:32:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DTSOe-0005lF-3h for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 04 May 2005 22:31:12 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DTSOd-0005kh-46 for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 04 May 2005 22:31:11 +0000 Received: from oe8.briank.com ([198.144.201.197]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DTSOX-0007Jg-Qw for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 04 May 2005 22:31:12 +0000 Received: from [198.144.196.7] ([198.144.196.7]) by oe8.briank.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id j44MUsDm016032; Wed, 4 May 2005 15:30:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from briank@briank.com) Message-ID: <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 15:30:50 -0700 From: Brian Korver User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Reschke CC: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass (maggie.w3.org: domain of briank@briank.com designates 198.144.201.197 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: e57a12db64809d3de7ddb4d660ae03a1 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42794D1A.6060701@briank.com Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9597 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 22:31:12 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Julian, I've already got an account there, so I can be the "initial owner". -brian briank@briank.com Julian Reschke wrote: > > Elias Sinderson wrote: > >> >> Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: >> >>> A New Internet-Draft is available [...] >>> >>> >> Having reviewed the latest quota draft, as well as pertinent mailing >> list discussions over the last six months, I concur with Julias >> assessment of the draft. That is, what few issues remain can be >> addressed during last call and I am supportive of initiating this >> process using the existing process that Joe suggested for the last >> call on BIND. >> >> I notice that there is no 'Product' entry for the quota spec in >> bugzilla - could we add this so that any remaining issues that are >> brought up may be tracked? > > > Yes. We can do that. Lisa, Brian, is one of you two volunteering to > become the "initial owner" for these bugs? (Brian, do you already have > an accoung over at ?) > > Best regards, Julian > From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 5 05:26:24 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA06113 for ; Thu, 5 May 2005 05:26:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DTcaW-0000xB-JO for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 05 May 2005 09:24:08 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DTcaT-0000wY-LD for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 05 May 2005 09:24:05 +0000 Received: from imap.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by lisa.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DTcaP-0003xk-Gv for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 05 May 2005 09:24:05 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 05 May 2005 09:23:57 -0000 Received: from p508FF16A.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.0.3]) [80.143.241.106] by mail.gmx.net (mp008) with SMTP; 05 May 2005 11:23:57 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 11:23:51 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brian Korver CC: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> In-Reply-To: <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Received-SPF: pass (lisa.w3.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.20 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 645f3cd81acbd75fc7cc5ea5f86eaecb X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/4279E627.9070808@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9598 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 09:24:08 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brian Korver wrote: > > Julian, > > I've already got an account there, so I can be the > "initial owner". > > -brian > briank@briank.com Thanks Brian. I have set up the BugZilla "product". As far as I am concerned, we've got all pieces in place to start a working group last call. Lisa? Joe? Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 5 08:49:49 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA21841 for ; Thu, 5 May 2005 08:49:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DTfm3-00016s-RF for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 05 May 2005 12:48:15 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DTfm2-00016K-R4 for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 05 May 2005 12:48:14 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DTflz-0006yq-0j for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 05 May 2005 12:48:14 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j45CllxO002832; Thu, 5 May 2005 05:47:47 -0700 Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 05:47:47 -0700 Message-Id: <200505051247.j45CllxO002832@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (lisa.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: dd3df023a31fbef91b5a397eb4d0af22 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 83] New: Differences for collections / non-collections X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505051247.j45CllxO002832@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9599 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 12:48:15 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83 Summary: Differences for collections / non-collections Product: WebDAV-QUOTA Version: -09 Platform: Other URL: http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav- quota-07.html#rfc.section.3 OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: 3. DAV:quota-available-bytes AssignedTo: briank@briank.com ReportedBy: julian.reschke@greenbytes.de QAContact: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org "Support for this property is REQUIRED on collections, and OPTIONAL on other resources." This requirement seems to complicate clients with little gain. Also it seems to be an optimization for a very specific implementation (which treats collections different from other resources). I recommend to drop the distinction. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Mon May 9 15:57:56 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA27068 for ; Mon, 9 May 2005 15:57:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVELw-00041s-3O for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 19:55:44 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVELu-00041D-3S for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 19:55:42 +0000 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVELo-0000Gg-Im for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 19:55:41 +0000 Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA26572; Mon, 9 May 2005 15:55:33 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200505091955.PAA26572@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 15:55:33 -0400 Received-SPF: none (bart.w3.org: domain of dinaras@cnri.reston.va.us does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 2688e1da0ac0150e19fb67c2432cdb0f X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-12.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505091955.PAA26572@ietf.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9600 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 19:55:44 +0000 --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the WWW Distributed Authoring and Versioning Working Group of the IETF. Title : Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV) Redirect Reference Resources Author(s) : J. Whitehead, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-12.txt Pages : 32 Date : 2005-5-9 This specification defines redirect reference resources. A redirect reference resource is a resource whose default response is an HTTP/1.1 3xx (Redirection) status code (see RFC2616, Section 10.3), redirecting the client to a different resource, the target resource. A redirect reference makes it possible to access the target resource indirectly, through any URI mapped to the redirect reference resource. There are no integrity guarantees associated with redirect reference resources. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-12.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-12.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-12.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2005-5-9160047.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-12.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-12.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2005-5-9160047.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Mon May 9 16:50:54 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA10066 for ; Mon, 9 May 2005 16:50:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVFCT-0001Wp-Ka for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 20:50:01 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVFCS-0001VA-Cv for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 20:50:00 +0000 Received: from pop.gmx.de ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by bart.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVExb-0005Lx-S9 for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 20:34:45 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 09 May 2005 20:34:16 -0000 Received: from p508FFA9D.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.0.3]) [80.143.250.157] by mail.gmx.net (mp005) with SMTP; 09 May 2005 22:34:16 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <427FC93E.1050806@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 22:34:06 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org References: <200505091955.PAA26572@ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <200505091955.PAA26572@ietf.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Received-SPF: pass (bart.w3.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.20 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 8e1a08345b00755f1a96424531d90791 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-12.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/427FC93E.1050806@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9601 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 20:50:01 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, this draft resolves a few editorial issues [1], and also allows (URI) fragments in reference targets (as discussed in the RFC2616 errata for the "Location" header, see [2]). As discussed earlier, I have also completed our own implementation in SAP Netweaver's Knowledge Management (both client and server). Thus, as far as I can tell, this draft is ready for a WG last call -- it has already passed a LC in 2000, and all issues raised during and since that LC ([3]) have been resolved. Lisa, Joe, please follow-up. Best regards, Julian [1] [2] [3] From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Mon May 9 17:37:05 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA14540 for ; Mon, 9 May 2005 17:37:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVFue-0005JY-Nk for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 21:35:40 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVFuc-0005Iu-TS for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 21:35:39 +0000 Received: from mail.gmx.de ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by maggie.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVFuZ-00078J-T9 for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 21:35:40 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 09 May 2005 21:35:19 -0000 Received: from p508FFA9D.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.0.3]) [80.143.250.157] by mail.gmx.net (mp025) with SMTP; 09 May 2005 23:35:19 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <427FD78F.2060208@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 23:35:11 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Received-SPF: pass (maggie.w3.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.20 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: ed2d6a147e6b9059787956b41ef5882a X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: RE: Working group moving forward? X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/427FD78F.2060208@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9602 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 21:35:40 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim Whitehead wrote six weeks ago: > Joe, > > Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the WebDAV WG, and its future > direction. Thank you as well for your contributions to this working group as > its Co-Chair. I know well that this is a time consuming and often thankless > task. > > But (and you knew a "but" was coming :-) I do disagree with you on several > points. > > >> My take on what I've seen in the last several months of the >> WebDAV working group is that if there was to be a BOF session >> today, I don't see any way that a working group would get >> approved. > > Irrelevant. In 1996 there was a clear and present need for an interoperable > web authoring standard. At that time, the WebDAV BOF had a standing room > crowd. Of course there would be fewer people today, just as it would be hard > to have a broadly attended FTP BOF, or Telnet BOF. We're not in that phase > of development. We're in completion mode, not ramp up mode. It's never > exciting to dot the final "i" and cross the final "t". > >> As far as where we are now, some of the current drafts might >> make much better progress as individual submissions. > > This is very unclear. The progress of individual submissions in the RFC > editor's queue, once they have received IESG approval, is glacial. They > never turn into RFCs. Working group documents fare much better in terms of > responsiveness. > >> Keep in mind that in the current process the WG chair has to shepard >> WG drafts through. As much as editors may not like this, it >> means that you have to get at least one WG chair fired >> up enough about your draft to take on this responsibility. > > A Chair assumes certain duties when they take on the position of Chair. > > I do not see any process RFC that states that document authors are required > to generate enthusiasm in their Chairs. > > >> My guess for BIND is that either Ted or Scott would want >> clarification on a couple of the interoperability questions >> that Lisa has raised, regardless of whether the answer can be >> inferred by a fully-informed reader. > > I agree, and applaud that you, as Chair, are helping to focus the discussion > of the working group on productive, tangible work items. > > >> Frankly, I don't think the working group process is adding >> much in the way of value for the drafts we are working on, >> compared with other WGs I've participated in. As such, it >> may be needless bureaucracy, and we ought to think about >> decommissioning it. > > I disagree. This working group has had a good track record over the past few > years of shipping specifications to RFC status (3648 in 12/2003, 3744 in > 5/2004). These specifications have had multiple implementations, and are in > shipping code that meet thousand's of people's needs on a daily basis. > > The issues raised in the recent last calls have been subtle, and resolving > them has significantly enhanced the quality and value of the final > specifications. IMO, this is evidence of a working group doing what it's > supposed to do: providing careful, informed review, and producing top > quality specifications. > > I think the WebDAV Working Group can very usefully serve two more purposes, > neither of which needs to take much time. > > 1) Complete BIND. > 2) Complete Quota. > > Both are very close to completion. Once these two are done, then it seems > reasonable to disband WebDAV WG. Given how close these two documents are to > being done, it would be a waste of all of the effort that has gone into them > to date to stop their development as WG items now. > > - Jim I'd really appreciate if the working group chairs would follow up. We need to have this dicussion. Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Mon May 9 18:17:20 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA18612 for ; Mon, 9 May 2005 18:17:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVGY5-0007Xq-WC for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 22:16:26 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVGY3-0007XA-Fw for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 22:16:23 +0000 Received: from kahuna.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVGY0-0000hI-9y for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 22:16:24 +0000 Old-X-Envelope-From: lisa@osafoundation.org Old-X-Envelope-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Received: from [192.168.101.178] (w002.z065106067.sjc-ca.dsl.cnc.net [65.106.67.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by kahuna.osafoundation.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j49MG2Og008924 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 9 May 2005 15:16:03 -0700 In-Reply-To: <427FD78F.2060208@gmx.de> References: <427FD78F.2060208@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <777370c9e0d24751a23e8b36b3792194@osafoundation.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 15:15:54 -0700 To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619.2) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 127.0.0.1 Received-SPF: pass (maggie.w3.org: domain of lisa@osafoundation.org designates 204.152.186.98 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 89ea6ac3c66a1c7a51d4aa74b6c80305 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: Working group moving forward? X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/777370c9e0d24751a23e8b36b3792194@osafoundation.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9603 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 22:16:25 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Julian, I've been completely out of touch on vacation since the last lull in conversation on this list. I'm still catching up. Joe seems offline today and I don't know what his status is -- likely travelling. Lisa On May 9, 2005, at 2:35 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > > Jim Whitehead wrote six weeks ago: > >> Joe, >> Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the WebDAV WG, and its future >> direction. Thank you as well for your contributions to this working >> group as >> its Co-Chair. I know well that this is a time consuming and often >> thankless >> task. >> But (and you knew a "but" was coming :-) I do disagree with you on >> several >> points. >>> My take on what I've seen in the last several months of the WebDAV >>> working group is that if there was to be a BOF session today, I >>> don't see any way that a working group would get approved. >> Irrelevant. In 1996 there was a clear and present need for an >> interoperable >> web authoring standard. At that time, the WebDAV BOF had a standing >> room >> crowd. Of course there would be fewer people today, just as it would >> be hard >> to have a broadly attended FTP BOF, or Telnet BOF. We're not in that >> phase >> of development. We're in completion mode, not ramp up mode. It's never >> exciting to dot the final "i" and cross the final "t". >>> As far as where we are now, some of the current drafts might make >>> much better progress as individual submissions. >> This is very unclear. The progress of individual submissions in the >> RFC >> editor's queue, once they have received IESG approval, is glacial. >> They >> never turn into RFCs. Working group documents fare much better in >> terms of >> responsiveness. >>> Keep in mind that in the current process the WG chair has to shepard >>> WG drafts through. As much as editors may not like this, it means >>> that you have to get at least one WG chair fired >>> up enough about your draft to take on this responsibility. >> A Chair assumes certain duties when they take on the position of >> Chair. I do not see any process RFC that states that document authors >> are required >> to generate enthusiasm in their Chairs. >>> My guess for BIND is that either Ted or Scott would want >>> clarification on a couple of the interoperability questions that >>> Lisa has raised, regardless of whether the answer can be inferred by >>> a fully-informed reader. >> I agree, and applaud that you, as Chair, are helping to focus the >> discussion >> of the working group on productive, tangible work items. >> >>> Frankly, I don't think the working group process is adding much in >>> the way of value for the drafts we are working on, compared with >>> other WGs I've participated in. As such, it may be needless >>> bureaucracy, and we ought to think about decommissioning it. >> I disagree. This working group has had a good track record over the >> past few >> years of shipping specifications to RFC status (3648 in 12/2003, 3744 >> in >> 5/2004). These specifications have had multiple implementations, and >> are in >> shipping code that meet thousand's of people's needs on a daily basis. >> The issues raised in the recent last calls have been subtle, and >> resolving >> them has significantly enhanced the quality and value of the final >> specifications. IMO, this is evidence of a working group doing what >> it's >> supposed to do: providing careful, informed review, and producing top >> quality specifications. >> I think the WebDAV Working Group can very usefully serve two more >> purposes, >> neither of which needs to take much time. >> 1) Complete BIND. >> 2) Complete Quota. >> Both are very close to completion. Once these two are done, then it >> seems >> reasonable to disband WebDAV WG. Given how close these two documents >> are to >> being done, it would be a waste of all of the effort that has gone >> into them >> to date to stop their development as WG items now. >> - Jim > > I'd really appreciate if the working group chairs would follow up. We > need to have this dicussion. > > > Best regards, Julian > From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Tue May 10 10:56:29 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA03811 for ; Tue, 10 May 2005 10:56:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVW7P-0000bM-AG for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 14:53:55 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVW7O-0000aj-Ao for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 14:53:54 +0000 Received: from mailimailo.univ-rennes1.fr ([129.20.131.1]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVW7H-0003ZZ-Qs for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 14:53:54 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailimailo.univ-rennes1.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AFDA2EEA for ; Tue, 10 May 2005 16:53:45 +0200 (MEST) Received: from mailimailo.univ-rennes1.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mailimailo.univ-rennes1.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 15299-01-76 for ; Tue, 10 May 2005 16:53:34 +0200 (MEST) Received: from [129.20.129.172] (mr129172.cri.univ-rennes1.fr [129.20.129.172]) by mailimailo.univ-rennes1.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19309469D for ; Tue, 10 May 2005 16:42:07 +0200 (MEST) Message-ID: <4280C841.7000108@univ-rennes1.fr> Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 16:42:09 +0200 From: Thomas Bellembois User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (Windows/20040502) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at univ-rennes1.fr Received-SPF: none (lisa.w3.org: domain of thomas.bellembois@univ-rennes1.fr does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: be8156c544b02645d50f65e1a0d10782 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: CMS Project - WebDAV quota development X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/4280C841.7000108@univ-rennes1.fr Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9604 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 14:53:55 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, Within the context of a CMS development we are currently developing a Slide based WebDAV server managing quotas. We have written a small document about the way we intend to develop our quota system, trying to stick close to a future standard. We would appreciate very much your opinion especially concerning a notion we have called "virtual root". This document is here : http://www.esup-portail.org/consortium/espace/Stockage_2F/serveur/documents/specifications/specifWebDAVQuotas.html Thank you. Thomas -- +---=( Thomas Bellembois )=---+ | CRI - University of Rennes 1 - FR | | thomas.bellembois@univ-rennes1.fr | | +33 2 23 23 69 60 | +-----------------------------------+ From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Tue May 10 14:18:50 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA28928 for ; Tue, 10 May 2005 14:18:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVZIJ-0007yz-0H for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 18:17:23 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVZIF-0007xV-VO for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 18:17:19 +0000 Received: from pop.gmx.de ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by lisa.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVZIA-0003Sm-9x for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 18:17:19 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 10 May 2005 18:17:11 -0000 Received: from p508F9C04.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.178.21]) [80.143.156.4] by mail.gmx.net (mp027) with SMTP; 10 May 2005 20:17:11 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <4280FA9E.5000206@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 20:17:02 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Thomas Bellembois CC: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org References: <4280C841.7000108@univ-rennes1.fr> In-Reply-To: <4280C841.7000108@univ-rennes1.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Received-SPF: pass (lisa.w3.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.20 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 2172699d7e5718c81d11bba60a863cbf X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: CMS Project - WebDAV quota development X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/4280FA9E.5000206@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9605 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 18:17:23 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Thomas Bellembois wrote: > > Hello, > > Within the context of a CMS development we are currently developing a > Slide based WebDAV server managing quotas. > We have written a small document about the way we intend to develop our > quota system, trying to stick close to a future standard. > We would appreciate very much your opinion especially concerning a > notion we have called "virtual root". > This document is here : > http://www.esup-portail.org/consortium/espace/Stockage_2F/serveur/documents/specifications/specifWebDAVQuotas.html I didn't read it all, but I noticed two things...: "# DAV:quota-available-bytes : value in octets representing the amount of disk space that can be allocated to this resource for further allocations – in KB or MB. # DAV:quota-used-bytes : value in octets representing the amount of disk space used by this resource – including its files and sub-collections but NOT its autonomous sub-collections – in KB or MB. # DAV:virtual-root defines an autonomous collection – true or false." 1) The Quota properties always count in bytes (octets), not KB or MB 2) You shouldn't use a property name of DAV:virtual-root (the DAV: namespace is reserved for things defined in IETF standards tracks documents). Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 11 10:26:03 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA08527 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 10:26:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVs7u-000208-TC for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 14:23:55 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVs7s-0001zY-HC for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 14:23:52 +0000 Received: from mailimailo.univ-rennes1.fr ([129.20.131.1]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVs7g-00023y-Bs for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 14:23:52 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailimailo.univ-rennes1.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A37D72ECD for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 16:23:38 +0200 (MEST) Received: from mailimailo.univ-rennes1.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mailimailo.univ-rennes1.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 08198-01-93 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 16:23:34 +0200 (MEST) Received: from [129.20.129.172] (mr129172.cri.univ-rennes1.fr [129.20.129.172]) by mailimailo.univ-rennes1.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 790DA2EC3 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 16:23:34 +0200 (MEST) Message-ID: <42821568.4090105@univ-rennes1.fr> Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 16:23:36 +0200 From: Thomas Bellembois User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (Windows/20040502) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org References: <4280C841.7000108@univ-rennes1.fr> <4280FA9E.5000206@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <4280FA9E.5000206@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at univ-rennes1.fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: none (bart.w3.org: domain of thomas.bellembois@univ-rennes1.fr does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: ff36e0768eb86ea8c912f27925071e6b X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: CMS Project - WebDAV quota development X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42821568.4090105@univ-rennes1.fr Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9606 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 14:23:54 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, Thank you very much for your answer. The KB MB or GB characters will not be used in metadata but only in the=20 file used to initialize/update metadata. The document is not clear about this point, I will modify it. I will change the namespace for the "virtualRoot" property. Thank you. Best Regards, Thomas Julian Reschke wrote: > > Thomas Bellembois wrote: > >> >> Hello, >> >> Within the context of a CMS development we are currently developing a=20 >> Slide based WebDAV server managing quotas. >> We have written a small document about the way we intend to develop=20 >> our quota system, trying to stick close to a future standard. >> We would appreciate very much your opinion especially concerning a=20 >> notion we have called "virtual root". >> This document is here :=20 >> http://www.esup-portail.org/consortium/espace/Stockage_2F/serveur/docu= ments/specifications/specifWebDAVQuotas.html=20 > > > > I didn't read it all, but I noticed two things...: > > "# DAV:quota-available-bytes : value in octets representing the amount=20 > of disk space that can be allocated to this resource for further=20 > allocations =96 in KB or MB. > # DAV:quota-used-bytes : value in octets representing the amount of=20 > disk space used by this resource =96 including its files and=20 > sub-collections but NOT its autonomous sub-collections =96 in KB or MB. > # DAV:virtual-root defines an autonomous collection =96 true or false." > > 1) The Quota properties always count in bytes (octets), not KB or MB > > 2) You shouldn't use a property name of DAV:virtual-root (the DAV:=20 > namespace is reserved for things defined in IETF standards tracks=20 > documents). > > Best regards, Julian > --=20 +---=3D( Thomas Bellembois )=3D---+ | CRI - University of Rennes 1 - FR | | thomas.bellembois@univ-rennes1.fr | | +33 2 23 23 69 60 | +-----------------------------------+ From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 11 15:00:41 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08567 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 15:00:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwQw-0004Sq-El for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 18:59:50 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwQv-0004SD-Pe for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 18:59:49 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwQr-0003dM-EQ for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 18:59:51 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j4BIxeMH027214; Wed, 11 May 2005 11:59:40 -0700 Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 11:59:40 -0700 Message-Id: <200505111859.j4BIxeMH027214@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (maggie.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: c74ac5d21f1a844c28f81db6f9b3d9aa X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 2] Bindings needs to completely describe how bindings interact with locks. X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505111859.j4BIxeMH027214@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9608 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 18:59:50 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2 elias@cse.ucsc.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 11 15:00:41 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08566 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 15:00:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwQ6-0004OY-46 for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 18:58:58 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwQ3-0004NN-PG for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 18:58:55 +0000 Received: from gate.arc.nasa.gov ([128.102.102.51]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwQ1-0000VA-9E for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 18:58:55 +0000 Received: from [143.232.67.216] (esinderson.arc.nasa.gov [143.232.67.216]) by gate.arc.nasa.gov ( -- Info omitted by ASANI Solutions, LLC.) with ESMTP id j4BIwpR16570 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 11:58:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <428255EB.6070100@cse.ucsc.edu> Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 11:58:51 -0700 From: Elias Sinderson User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Macintosh/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "'webdav'" References: <200503172358.j2HNwt05017452@services.cse.ucsc.edu> <4251A2AE.7020101@gmx.de> <426B6F09.1050000@gmx.de> <426D5417.9000001@cse.ucsc.edu> <426EA194.6090304@gmx.de> <42754468.2040509@cse.ucsc.edu> In-Reply-To: <42754468.2040509@cse.ucsc.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: none (lisa.w3.org: domain of elias@cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: dcd3b3d7b49b62c6c154c7aeec4a3d82 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: Moving forward on BIND X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/428255EB.6070100@cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9607 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 18:58:58 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit All, As much as I hate replying to my own postings? Elias Sinderson wrote: > Having reviewed all of the open issues, relevant sections of BIND and > related specs, I would like to summarize my position wrt BIND. The > existing issues all seem to have been sufficiently addressed and there > have been motions made for each to be closed (or reassigned, as in the > case of issue 5). [...] The motions mentioned above are now two weeks old. ... > Joe's last call process email, "WG Last Call on BIND" [1], states: > - The issue opener may close the issue, if the vote count is still 0 > - If the vote count is >0, only a working group chair or person > designated by the chair may close the issue > and > - Issues that have 0 votes at the end of last call will be closed > automatically It would seem that all pretense at process has fallen by the wayside as far as the WG chairs are concerned. Nevertheless, I'll endeavor to make good in spirit. ... > Neglecting the fact that the last call ended almost exactly three > months ago [...] I would request that the WG chairs close them (or > designate some to do so on their behalf) within the week. > > Regarding Issue 2, the issue opener and only voter for the issue are > the current WG chairs - might I request that they both promptly review > the issue and associated commentary as well as the new text that was > added to resolve the issue? Hearing no dissention for two weeks since motions were made to close the open issues, and similar silence fro the WG chairs, I am appointing myself the 'Bugzilla Killa' - you will see some emails from Bugzilla over the next few minutes as I close the open issues. Apologies for stepping all over the process, especially to those who left it on the floor to be stepped on. ... Cheers, Elias From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 11 15:01:58 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08643 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 15:01:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwSU-0006hf-Ij for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 19:01:26 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwST-0006gh-7a for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 19:01:25 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwSP-0008LQ-BE for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 19:01:24 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j4BJ1KDi027245; Wed, 11 May 2005 12:01:20 -0700 Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 12:01:20 -0700 Message-Id: <200505111901.j4BJ1KDi027245@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (bart.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: e27ef14ba296d9f8b78de08dc45e82ad X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 71] Clarify what servers may and may not do with privileges when BIND is used X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505111901.j4BJ1KDi027245@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9609 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 19:01:26 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71 elias@cse.ucsc.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 11 15:02:32 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08741 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 15:02:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwT3-0006qD-6n for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 19:02:01 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwT1-0006pO-00 for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 19:01:59 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwSy-0008Sf-8T for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 19:01:58 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j4BJ1ukA027261; Wed, 11 May 2005 12:01:56 -0700 Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 12:01:56 -0700 Message-Id: <200505111901.j4BJ1ukA027261@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (bart.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 8839aa9c7027f65823c4c2bc8802dbd1 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 76] What event does creationdate refer to X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505111901.j4BJ1ukA027261@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9610 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 19:02:01 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=76 elias@cse.ucsc.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 11 15:03:35 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08867 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 15:03:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwU1-00072V-1u for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 19:03:01 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwTz-00071s-Pd for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 19:02:59 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwTx-0000CY-1A for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 19:02:59 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j4BJ2vRY027277; Wed, 11 May 2005 12:02:57 -0700 Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 12:02:57 -0700 Message-Id: <200505111902.j4BJ2vRY027277@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (bart.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 1859d0841a3c3fc3b1498b8ecf46d501 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 77] Do Bind operations change the getlastmodified or getetag property values X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505111902.j4BJ2vRY027277@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9611 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 19:03:01 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77 elias@cse.ucsc.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 11 15:04:07 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08908 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 15:04:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwUa-0007EB-LJ for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 19:03:36 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwUa-0007DY-3A for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 19:03:36 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVwUX-0001IK-ON for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 19:03:36 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j4BJ3W1w027295; Wed, 11 May 2005 12:03:32 -0700 Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 12:03:32 -0700 Message-Id: <200505111903.j4BJ3W1w027295@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (lisa.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 9c147580e348def6f9f61220a3787df9 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 78] Value of ETag and getlastmodified properties on multiple bindings X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505111903.j4BJ3W1w027295@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9612 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 19:03:36 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78 elias@cse.ucsc.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 11 17:07:56 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA26474 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 17:07:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVyPT-0002xo-2L for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 21:06:27 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVyPQ-0002x9-7Y for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 21:06:24 +0000 Received: from kahuna.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVyPM-0000ef-40 for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 21:06:24 +0000 Old-X-Envelope-From: lisa@osafoundation.org Old-X-Envelope-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([198.144.201.116]) (authenticated bits=0) by kahuna.osafoundation.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4BL6A4X029136 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 11 May 2005 14:06:13 -0700 In-Reply-To: <200505012034.j41KYnoH030959@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> References: <200505012034.j41KYnoH030959@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: webdav WG From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 14:06:02 -0700 To: Elias Sinderson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619.2) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 127.0.0.1 Received-SPF: pass (lisa.w3.org: domain of lisa@osafoundation.org designates 204.152.186.98 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 3491bec5f9640d557c0b055807b17e80 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: [Bug 71] Clarify what servers may and may not do with privileges when BIND is used X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/e3be1623a84c49aec2a55db938e28efb@osafoundation.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9613 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 21:06:27 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Elias, I guess you didn't see my recent mail about being on a several-week vacation? I was gone the whole time of the conversations that you wanted a timely response for. It was a long absence, but I promise I won't have frequent honeymoons. As for managing the Bugzilla bug status, I had kind of assumed that was a failed experiment. Until you responded, Julian and I were the only ones who had used the system. Without any usage, it certainly wasn't working as expected. I appreciate you trying to use it as intended but it still might be a broken process. With respect to this particular bug, I don't agree this should be closed. The specification doesn't say what permissions changes might be applied when BIND or REBIND methods are successful at creating new bindings. I had a strawman proposal and I'd like to see some feedback on it: "When a client uses BIND or REBIND to create/modify a binding to an existing resource, the server has three options: treat this as a new resource and overwrite the resource ACL with the permissions that would be inherited in the location of the new binding, treat this as an existing resource and do no ACL inheritance, or take a middle path and use ACL inheritance in the new location by adding the permissions granted to the ACLs already on the resource. A server SHOULD follow the last approach, as being the approach assumed to be closest to the user's desired model, where a resource bound to multiple URLs ought to be available to principals who would be able to access that URL had it been bound using PUT." With respect to other bugs, I'll try to get to my issues but I'm still catching up at work too. Lisa On May 1, 2005, at 1:34 PM, bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu wrote: > http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71 > > > > > > ------- Additional Comments From elias@cse.ucsc.edu 2005-05-01 13:34 > ------- > "I believe we should close this issue. > After taking the time to review the relevant sections in the ACL and > BIND specs, my conclusion is that the existing text is sufficient." > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2005AprJun/0029.html > > > > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 11 17:55:33 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA00538 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 17:55:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVzA6-0006ok-Mg for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 21:54:38 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVzA1-0006o2-I9 for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 21:54:33 +0000 Received: from pop.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by lisa.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVz9x-0006dD-Vr for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 21:54:33 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 11 May 2005 21:54:26 -0000 Received: from p508F8E81.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.178.21]) [80.143.142.129] by mail.gmx.net (mp019) with SMTP; 11 May 2005 23:54:26 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <42827F09.4090807@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 23:54:17 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lisa Dusseault CC: Elias Sinderson , webdav WG References: <200505012034.j41KYnoH030959@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Received-SPF: pass (lisa.w3.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.20 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: f2c9ba951982ed8088bb59e325c558a8 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: [Bug 71] Clarify what servers may and may not do with privileges when BIND is used X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42827F09.4090807@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9614 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 21:54:38 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote: > > Elias, I guess you didn't see my recent mail about being on a > several-week vacation? I was gone the whole time of the conversations > that you wanted a timely response for. It was a long absence, but I > promise I won't have frequent honeymoons. So what about Joe? I would have assumed that one of the benefits having two WG chairs is to reduce the amount of time where no chair is available to run the working group? > As for managing the Bugzilla bug status, I had kind of assumed that was > a failed experiment. Until you responded, Julian and I were the only > ones who had used the system. Without any usage, it certainly wasn't Plus Jim. Plus Geoff. Plus Elias. > working as expected. I appreciate you trying to use it as intended but > it still might be a broken process. This I agree with. > With respect to this particular bug, I don't agree this should be > closed. The specification doesn't say what permissions changes might be > applied when BIND or REBIND methods are successful at creating new > bindings. I had a strawman proposal and I'd like to see some feedback > on it: > > "When a client uses BIND or REBIND to create/modify a binding to an > existing > resource, the server has three options: treat this as a new resource and > overwrite the resource ACL with the permissions that would be inherited > in the > location of the new binding, treat this as an existing resource and do > no ACL > inheritance, or take a middle path and use ACL inheritance in the new > location > by adding the permissions granted to the ACLs already on the resource. > A server > SHOULD follow the last approach, as being the approach assumed to be > closest to > the user's desired model, where a resource bound to multiple URLs ought > to be > available to principals who would be able to access that URL had it been > bound > using PUT." So, no, it's not the BIND spec which should define this. Also not that Joe *did* follow up on this in the thread starting at , and that as a consequence the following change was made in the spec: (): "BIND and REBIND behave the same as MOVE with respect to the DAV:acl property (see [RFC3744], section 7.3)." As far as I can tell, you even agreed to this resolution in : "This is fine with me for BIND, and I think the same is also true of REBIND and UNBIND." So it is really really unclear to me how you can reasonably claim that the issue hasn't been resolved. > With respect to other bugs, I'll try to get to my issues but I'm still > catching up at work too. Well, we've been waiting for over three months now, so it wasn't unreasonable for Elias to go ahead and assume that there'll be no new feedback. And, as far as bug #71 is concerned, I think he was indeed correct in assuming so. Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 11 17:58:22 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA00713 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 17:58:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DVzDD-0007Lz-9U for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 21:57:51 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVzD7-0007LC-5y for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 21:57:45 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DVzD3-0008Bu-Ra for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 21:57:45 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j4BLvfUE027455; Wed, 11 May 2005 14:57:41 -0700 Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 14:57:41 -0700 Message-Id: <200505112157.j4BLvfUE027455@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact Received-SPF: none (bart.w3.org: domain of hunkim@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 3ba3dd4698d049e14b057455f16a3972 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 71] Clarify what servers may and may not do with privileges when BIND is used X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505112157.j4BLvfUE027455@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9615 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 21:57:51 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71 julian.reschke@greenbytes.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |http://greenbytes.de/tech/we | |bdav/draft-ietf-webdav-bind- | |issues.html#9_ns_op_and_acl ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 11 18:54:03 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA06867 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 18:54:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DW04T-0001lN-Q4 for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 22:52:53 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DW04S-0001kN-Kj for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 22:52:52 +0000 Received: from oe8.briank.com ([198.144.201.197]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DW04P-0003tM-3E for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 11 May 2005 22:52:52 +0000 Received: from [192.168.255.20] (Rainier-AirPort.local.briank.com [192.168.255.20]) by oe8.briank.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id j4BMqWSY016783; Wed, 11 May 2005 15:52:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from briank@briank.com) In-Reply-To: <4280C841.7000108@univ-rennes1.fr> References: <4280C841.7000108@univ-rennes1.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <2d3add688acf7ea80e9f1ae3aca8b067@briank.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org From: Brian Korver Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 15:52:26 -0700 To: Thomas Bellembois X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) Received-SPF: pass (lisa.w3.org: domain of briank@briank.com designates 198.144.201.197 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 8ed898c42e311f2e662f86f63b22e7d9 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: CMS Project - WebDAV quota development X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/2d3add688acf7ea80e9f1ae3aca8b067@briank.com Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9616 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 22:52:53 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In the Notes section, the document asks 'Do we have to expose the "virtualRoot" metadata to clients?'. I think the answer is no. The notion of virtualRoot seems to exist merely for administrative purposes and isn't something a general-purpose client would care to know about or be able to use in any way that would make sense to the user. Note that the implementation of quotas that you describe is very similar to the implementation in Xythos' WFS. -brian briank@briank.com On May 10, 2005, at 7:42 AM, Thomas Bellembois wrote: > > Hello, > > Within the context of a CMS development we are currently developing a > Slide based WebDAV server managing quotas. > We have written a small document about the way we intend to develop > our quota system, trying to stick close to a future standard. > We would appreciate very much your opinion especially concerning a > notion we have called "virtual root". > This document is here : > http://www.esup-portail.org/consortium/espace/Stockage_2F/serveur/ > documents/specifications/specifWebDAVQuotas.html > > Thank you. > > Thomas > > -- > +---=( Thomas Bellembois )=---+ > | CRI - University of Rennes 1 - FR | > | thomas.bellembois@univ-rennes1.fr | > | +33 2 23 23 69 60 | > +-----------------------------------+ > > From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 12 14:35:28 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA19499 for ; Thu, 12 May 2005 14:35:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DWIUM-00009B-8a for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 12 May 2005 18:32:50 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DWIUK-00008d-3i for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 12 May 2005 18:32:48 +0000 Received: from kahuna.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DWIUH-0001Yt-87 for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 12 May 2005 18:32:47 +0000 Old-X-Envelope-From: lisa@osafoundation.org Old-X-Envelope-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Received: from [192.168.101.178] (w002.z065106067.sjc-ca.dsl.cnc.net [65.106.67.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by kahuna.osafoundation.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4CIWK4X029712 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 12 May 2005 11:32:21 -0700 In-Reply-To: <426EB0DF.3080607@cse.ucsc.edu> References: <200503172358.j2HNwt05017452@services.cse.ucsc.edu> <4251A2AE.7020101@gmx.de> <426B6F09.1050000@gmx.de> <426D5417.9000001@cse.ucsc.edu> <426EA194.6090304@gmx.de> <426EB0DF.3080607@cse.ucsc.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <0031dacfa11f754bc807aecb53ebdcf3@osafoundation.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Julian Reschke , "'webdav'" From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 11:15:26 -0700 To: Elias Sinderson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 127.0.0.1 Received-SPF: pass (lisa.w3.org: domain of lisa@osafoundation.org designates 204.152.186.98 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: e366803c0d6211ebec54630dd81f5926 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: Issue 71, Clarify what servers may and may not do with privileges when BIND is used (was: Moving forward on BIND) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/0031dacfa11f754bc807aecb53ebdcf3@osafoundation.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9617 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 18:32:50 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I agree with this. But what about conventions about whether resource permissions may be changed when new bindings are created to it? - e.g. I have a share directory --> I add a binding into the share directory, to a file that's in an unshared directory MAY the server change the permissions on the target file as a result of a bind operation? That's what I expect the user might normally want, but it should probably be the responsibility of the client, not the server. So we should say the server MUST NOT change the permissions? Lisa On Apr 26, 2005, at 2:21 PM, Elias Sinderson wrote: > > Julian Reschke wrote: > >> [...] most of the open Bugzilla issues should have been closed [...] > > 71, Clarify what servers may and may not do with privileges when BIND > is used > As ACLs are defined on resources, not bindings, I don't see how the > spec can say much that hasn't already been said. There are, however, > potential issues with bindings across different security domains. If > anything, I would advocate a restrictive approach to permissions. That > is, permissions on bindings SHOULD default to those of the resource > where possible, but MAY be restricted when bindings are made across > namespaces with different permissions. Permissions MUST NOT be granted > or extended in the above scenario. As I see it, this is the prudent > thing to do in this situation. The only other option would be to > forbid bindings across security domains that cannot maintain the > existing permissions exactly as they are on the resource (if, for > example, a given principledid not exist and could not be created). > > Comments? > > > Best, > Elias > From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 12 15:01:35 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21812 for ; Thu, 12 May 2005 15:01:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DWIvR-0000kP-Mu for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 12 May 2005 19:00:49 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DWIvQ-0000jZ-Dq for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 12 May 2005 19:00:48 +0000 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]) by lisa.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DWIvM-0005Ts-Ir for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 12 May 2005 19:00:48 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 12 May 2005 19:00:41 -0000 Received: from p508FADEE.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.178.21]) [80.143.173.238] by mail.gmx.net (mp020) with SMTP; 12 May 2005 21:00:41 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <4283A7D6.6080001@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 21:00:38 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lisa Dusseault CC: Elias Sinderson , "'webdav'" References: <200503172358.j2HNwt05017452@services.cse.ucsc.edu> <4251A2AE.7020101@gmx.de> <426B6F09.1050000@gmx.de> <426D5417.9000001@cse.ucsc.edu> <426EA194.6090304@gmx.de> <426EB0DF.3080607@cse.ucsc.edu> <0031dacfa11f754bc807aecb53ebdcf3@osafoundation.org> In-Reply-To: <0031dacfa11f754bc807aecb53ebdcf3@osafoundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Received-SPF: pass (lisa.w3.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.20 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: d6192920998ae97d585ee49f8375dc18 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: Issue 71, Clarify what servers may and may not do with privileges when BIND is used X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/4283A7D6.6080001@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9618 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 19:00:49 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote: > > I agree with this. > > But what about conventions about whether resource permissions may be > changed when new bindings are created to it? > - e.g. I have a share directory > --> I add a binding into the share directory, to a file that's in an > unshared directory > > MAY the server change the permissions on the target file as a result of > a bind operation? That's what I expect the user might normally want, > but it should probably be the responsibility of the client, not the > server. So we should say the server MUST NOT change the permissions? Lisa, this issue was discussed and resolved with the text proposed by Geoff in . The BIND operations do not add anything interesting new to the interaction between ACLs and namespace operations. If you feel the WebDAV family of specs should restrict what a server may do beyond...: "Handling of inherited and protected ACEs is intentionally undefined to give server implementations flexibility in how they implement ACE inheritance and protection." () then by all means raise this as issue against RFC2518 and/or RFC3744. This really has nothing to do with BIND. Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Fri May 13 00:43:48 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA16079 for ; Fri, 13 May 2005 00:43:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DWRzv-0001UM-K6 for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 13 May 2005 04:42:03 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DWRzq-0001SW-MY for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 13 May 2005 04:41:58 +0000 Received: from mail24.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.117.26]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DWRzo-00017T-8s for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Fri, 13 May 2005 04:42:00 +0000 Received: (qmail 779 invoked from network); 13 May 2005 04:41:51 -0000 Received: from dsl081-070-219.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO cse.ucsc.edu) (elias@[64.81.70.219]) (envelope-sender ) by mail24.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 13 May 2005 04:41:50 -0000 Message-ID: <42843087.2070502@cse.ucsc.edu> Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 21:43:51 -0700 From: Elias Sinderson Reply-To: webdav WG User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Windows/20040207) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: webdav WG References: <200505012034.j41KYnoH030959@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: none (maggie.w3.org: domain of elias@cse.ucsc.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: b90c0cfb110dedeb0ced6d4119f7c986 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: [Bug 71] Clarify what servers may and may not do with privileges when BIND is used X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42843087.2070502@cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9619 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 04:42:03 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote: > As for managing the Bugzilla bug status, I had kind of assumed that > was a failed experiment. Until you responded, Julian and I were the > only ones who had used the system. Without any usage, it certainly > wasn't working as expected. I appreciate you trying to use it as > intended but it still might be a broken process. Few things are created perfect the first time around - I think it is useful but we may need to work with it for a while before we come across a process that feels right. For example, it is unclear whether it would be preferred in the long term to carry out 'discussion' of an issue in the bugzilla comments or the WG email list, or both. As much as this, and perhaps other WG processes, needs to be discussed, my preference would be to spend the energy getting a draft (or two?) out the door first, if possible. Both BIND and QUOTA have come a long way, however slowly, and it would be nice to put the final work into them before getting stuck on process issues. > With respect to this particular bug, I don't agree this should be > closed. [...] Apologies, once again, for stepping on the process, it was an honest attempt to move things forward from where they had been for months. Before closing the issue, I read over the associated commentary / discussion on both bugzilla and the WG list, read the latest draft of BIND and the relevant sections of ACL, attempted to accurately summarize peoples positions and stated my own conclusions on the WG list, subsequently made a motion for the issue to be closed and waited two weeks for any dissenting opinions to be voiced. By all appearances, it seemed the next logical thing to do was to close the issue. From my point of view, it still is, however you may disagree with that conclusion - is there an issue that has been identified with the text that was added to the draft? My reading of things was that there was better than rough consensus on the current resolution at the time it was being discussed on the list. Cheers, Elias From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Mon May 16 09:01:18 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA07826 for ; Mon, 16 May 2005 09:01:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DXfBg-0004Mx-G4 for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 16 May 2005 12:59:12 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DXfBe-0004HJ-LG for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 16 May 2005 12:59:11 +0000 Received: from mail.gmx.de ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by maggie.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DXfAG-0005tP-Cv for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Mon, 16 May 2005 12:58:39 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 16 May 2005 12:56:38 -0000 Received: from p508FB287.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.178.21]) [80.143.178.135] by mail.gmx.net (mp008) with SMTP; 16 May 2005 14:56:38 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <4288987E.9080309@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 14:56:30 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lisa Dusseault CC: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org, Joe Hildebrand References: <427FD78F.2060208@gmx.de> <777370c9e0d24751a23e8b36b3792194@osafoundation.org> In-Reply-To: <777370c9e0d24751a23e8b36b3792194@osafoundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Received-SPF: pass (maggie.w3.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.20 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: a79e93fd36123cfbcaa780cb56170b12 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: Working group moving forward? X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/4288987E.9080309@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9620 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 12:59:12 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote six days ago: > > Hi Julian, > > I've been completely out of touch on vacation since the last lull in > conversation on this list. I'm still catching up. Joe seems offline > today and I don't know what his status is -- likely travelling. > > Lisa Lisa, I fully understand that WG chairs do voluntary work, and that they can't always dedicate as much time they'd like to spend for WH activities; be it because of travel, vacation or other job-related priorities. On the other hand, this discussion is essential for how this WG is supposed to operate in the future, if at all. Therefore I don't think it's not too much to ask the WG chairs to paticipate in this discussion. At some point, one reasonable and likely interpretation of a WG chair's silence on that matter seems to be that (s)he doesn't care or even doesn't read the list anymore. In that case it seems that the chair should either step down, letting others try to help the WG to achieve it's chartered goals, or alternatively, follow up with the IETF with the proposal to shut down (or re-charter) the WG. At this point, the WG has three chartered deliverables: BIND: this specification has passed *two* working group last calls, and at this point it's unclear to me why it hasn't been submitted to the IESG for publication. REDIRECT: this spec has passed one WG last call a few years ago, and since then all open issues have been resolved, and at least one implementation exists. This spec is clearly ready for another WG last call or publication. If the chairs feel that it shouldn't be published at "Proposed" level, please clearly state this, in which case we can either discuss publication as "Experimental", or I'll consider a private submission. RFC2518bis: no activity for almost one year, and the last draft has expired. There's another WG deliverable, QUOTA, which isn't on the charter but seems to be ready for LC as well. So by all means please follow up on both the meta issue (how the WG should proceed), and on the three documents that are basically done (BIND, REDIRECT, QUOTA). My preference would be to submit BIND for publication, and to WG-last-call the other two (probably QUOTA first because of it's simplicity). Once these are in the publication queue, the WG can focus on progressing RFC2518 to Draft Standard. How to do that best will be another interesting discussion. Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Mon May 16 20:53:32 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA21550 for ; Mon, 16 May 2005 20:53:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DXqJM-0003xr-Ux for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 17 May 2005 00:51:52 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DXqJL-0003wL-US for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 17 May 2005 00:51:51 +0000 Received: from kahuna.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DXqJI-0003Rs-1D for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Tue, 17 May 2005 00:51:51 +0000 Old-X-Envelope-From: lisa@osafoundation.org Old-X-Envelope-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Received: from [192.168.101.178] (w002.z065106067.sjc-ca.dsl.cnc.net [65.106.67.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by kahuna.osafoundation.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4H0pMPC025395 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 16 May 2005 17:51:24 -0700 In-Reply-To: <4288987E.9080309@gmx.de> References: <427FD78F.2060208@gmx.de> <777370c9e0d24751a23e8b36b3792194@osafoundation.org> <4288987E.9080309@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <762bd5814e73825182d3f3631dd5f816@osafoundation.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org, Joe Hildebrand From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 17:51:16 -0700 To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 127.0.0.1 Received-SPF: pass (bart.w3.org: domain of lisa@osafoundation.org designates 204.152.186.98 as permitted sender) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 1e2a5af43506a83cb1145aa1ca7d5bce X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: Working group moving forward? X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/762bd5814e73825182d3f3631dd5f816@osafoundation.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9621 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 00:51:52 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Julian, Joe and I are discussing these issues with Ted now that we're all back from various trips and absences. Lisa On May 16, 2005, at 5:56 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > Lisa Dusseault wrote six days ago: >> Hi Julian, >> I've been completely out of touch on vacation since the last lull in >> conversation on this list. I'm still catching up. Joe seems offline >> today and I don't know what his status is -- likely travelling. >> Lisa > > Lisa, > > I fully understand that WG chairs do voluntary work, and that they > can't always dedicate as much time they'd like to spend for WH > activities; be it because of travel, vacation or other job-related > priorities. > > On the other hand, this discussion is essential for how this WG is > supposed to operate in the future, if at all. Therefore I don't think > it's not too much to ask the WG chairs to paticipate in this > discussion. > > At some point, one reasonable and likely interpretation of a WG > chair's silence on that matter seems to be that (s)he doesn't care or > even doesn't read the list anymore. > > In that case it seems that the chair should either step down, letting > others try to help the WG to achieve it's chartered goals, or > alternatively, follow up with the IETF with the proposal to shut down > (or re-charter) the WG. > > At this point, the WG has three chartered deliverables: > > BIND: this specification has passed *two* working group last calls, > and at this point it's unclear to me why it hasn't been submitted to > the IESG for publication. > > REDIRECT: this spec has passed one WG last call a few years ago, and > since then all open issues have been resolved, and at least one > implementation exists. This spec is clearly ready for another WG last > call or publication. If the chairs feel that it shouldn't be published > at "Proposed" level, please clearly state this, in which case we can > either discuss publication as "Experimental", or I'll consider a > private submission. > > RFC2518bis: no activity for almost one year, and the last draft has > expired. > > There's another WG deliverable, QUOTA, which isn't on the charter but > seems to be ready for LC as well. > > So by all means please follow up on both the meta issue (how the WG > should proceed), and on the three documents that are basically done > (BIND, REDIRECT, QUOTA). My preference would be to submit BIND for > publication, and to WG-last-call the other two (probably QUOTA first > because of it's simplicity). Once these are in the publication queue, > the WG can focus on progressing RFC2518 to Draft Standard. How to do > that best will be another interesting discussion. > > > Best regards, Julian > > > > From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 18 21:57:21 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA16887 for ; Wed, 18 May 2005 21:57:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DYaFi-00044W-Mj for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 01:55:10 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DYaFd-00043G-Bd for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 01:55:05 +0000 Received: from kahuna.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DYaFa-0004AZ-AJ for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 01:55:05 +0000 Old-X-Envelope-From: lisa@osafoundation.org Old-X-Envelope-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([198.144.201.116]) (authenticated bits=0) by kahuna.osafoundation.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4J1suso005539 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 18 May 2005 18:54:57 -0700 In-Reply-To: <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org, Brian Korver From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:53:48 -0700 To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 127.0.0.1 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 73cc1a83c13fae9d7e0f7411b0e6fc68 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/c5e96624db58cca6d947b1475f0d9d88@osafoundation.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9622 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 01:55:10 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On May 5, 2005, at 2:23 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > I have set up the BugZilla "product". As far as I am concerned, we've > got all pieces in place to start a working group last call. > I am not sure about continuing with the bugzilla process if there's general agreement that it's broken. Input is appreciated. I do agree that quota is ready for last call, however it's not much use going through that if we can't pull together the reviews required by the new IESG processes. Who is planning to implement quota? Who can do a review of this draft during last call? thanks, Lisa From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 19 03:37:17 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA29703 for ; Thu, 19 May 2005 03:37:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DYfZW-00055x-QE for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:35:58 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DYfNV-00089D-5F for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:23:33 +0000 Received: from pop.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by bart.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DYfNP-0000pj-Jy for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:23:33 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 19 May 2005 07:23:25 -0000 Received: from p508FA51E.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.178.21]) [80.143.165.30] by mail.gmx.net (mp026) with SMTP; 19 May 2005 09:23:25 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 09:23:18 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lisa Dusseault CC: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org, Brian Korver References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: cb85d32486ddf77f6180aa232af6379a X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9623 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 07:35:58 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote: > ... > I do agree that quota is ready for last call, however it's not much use > going through that if we can't pull together the reviews required by the > new IESG processes. Who is planning to implement quota? Who can do a > review of this draft during last call? > ... Please elaborate: what are the "new" IESG processes, and in which way do they pose new requirements on reviews? (Pointer?) Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 19 10:36:40 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA10919 for ; Thu, 19 May 2005 10:36:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DYm6e-00062k-Oz for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 14:34:36 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DYm6d-00061z-MU for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 14:34:35 +0000 Received: from mail-out4.apple.com ([17.254.13.23]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DYm2f-00035t-7M for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 14:34:35 +0000 Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (a17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225]) by mail-out4.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j4JEUS7B025505 for ; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:30:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay2.apple.com (relay2.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.17) with ESMTP id for ; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:30:27 -0700 Received: from [17.202.43.76] (luthji.apple.com [17.202.43.76]) by relay2.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j4JEUPoN013215 for ; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:30:26 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v728) In-Reply-To: References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <40B34A88-4E35-463A-8BD4-A3EC905C0274@apple.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Jim Luther Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 07:30:24 -0700 To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.728) X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: d413152ec3613c8bb108954fd50d8b6d X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/40B34A88-4E35-463A-8BD4-A3EC905C0274@apple.com Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9624 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 14:34:36 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On May 18, 2005, at 6:53 PM, Lisa Dusseault wrote: > Who is planning to implement quota? I plan to support the new quota properties in the Mac OS X WebDAV file system client. - Jim From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 19 10:39:48 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA11295 for ; Thu, 19 May 2005 10:39:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DYmBA-0007li-9q for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 14:39:16 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DYmB5-0007l8-76 for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 14:39:11 +0000 Received: from kahuna.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DYm7N-0003Bu-3P for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 14:39:13 +0000 Old-X-Envelope-From: lisa@osafoundation.org Old-X-Envelope-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([198.144.201.116]) (authenticated bits=0) by kahuna.osafoundation.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4JEYmso009487 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 19 May 2005 07:35:01 -0700 In-Reply-To: <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "'webdav' WG" From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 07:33:41 -0700 To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 127.0.0.1 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 8494fbf18a2580ff26655d92cb67abcd X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9625 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 14:39:16 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A lot of it is described in here: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc- shepherding-05.txt Other details depend on the AD. Lisa On May 19, 2005, at 12:23 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > Lisa Dusseault wrote: >> ... >> I do agree that quota is ready for last call, however it's not much >> use going through that if we can't pull together the reviews required >> by the new IESG processes. Who is planning to implement quota? Who >> can do a review of this draft during last call? >> ... > > Please elaborate: what are the "new" IESG processes, and in which way > do they pose new requirements on reviews? (Pointer?) > > Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 19 12:06:01 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA19767 for ; Thu, 19 May 2005 12:06:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DYnW2-00022p-MY for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 16:04:54 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DYnW1-00022E-IU for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 16:04:53 +0000 Received: from ietf.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.52.130]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DYnRs-0004ki-1y for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 16:04:53 +0000 Received: (from hunkim@localhost) by ietf.cse.ucsc.edu (8.12.8/8.11.4) id j4JG0ZQh015322; Thu, 19 May 2005 09:00:35 -0700 Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 09:00:35 -0700 Message-Id: <200505191600.j4JG0ZQh015322@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAContact X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 9086dd83965fd0d963b00dcf293441b7 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: [Bug 84] New: Ackowledgements should include Clark Warner X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505191600.j4JG0ZQh015322@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9626 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 16:04:54 +0000 http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84 Summary: Ackowledgements should include Clark Warner Product: WebDAV-QUOTA Version: -09 Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: 11. Acknowledgements AssignedTo: briank@briank.com ReportedBy: luther.j@apple.com QAContact: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Clark Warner was one of the original authors of the early drafts of WebDAV Quotas so he should be listed in the acknowledgments. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Fri May 20 02:38:12 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA11550 for ; Fri, 20 May 2005 02:38:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DZ16f-0001xj-C0 for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 20 May 2005 06:35:37 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DZ16Y-0001we-Mo for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 20 May 2005 06:35:30 +0000 Received: from services.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.48.10]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DZ16W-0004q3-AB for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Fri, 20 May 2005 06:35:30 +0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ap11.doubletree.sdsl [66.109.156.11] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by services.cse.ucsc.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j4K6ZQwC029383 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 19 May 2005 23:35:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <428D852C.1090909@cse.ucsc.edu> Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 23:35:24 -0700 From: Elias Sinderson Reply-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Signature: 51d8b803f7d79d2b0f55f3f9bab4e395 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/428D852C.1090909@cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9627 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 06:35:37 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote: > I am not sure about continuing with the bugzilla process if there's > general agreement that it's broken. Input is appreciated. I found it to be very useful in that there was a single place to go to when I want to see the issues and their states for a given draft. Just out of curiosity, how many user accounts are there? > I do agree that quota is ready for last call, however it's not much > use going through that if we can't pull together the reviews required > by the new IESG processes. Who is planning to implement quota? Who > can do a review of this draft during last call? I will review QUOTA if there is a LC issued. The most recent draft looks quite good, although my latest reading was primarily wrt the resolution of issues that had been raised. Best, Elias From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Mon May 23 05:04:36 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA05942 for ; Mon, 23 May 2005 05:04:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1Da8pJ-0007Tq-NM for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 23 May 2005 09:02:21 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Da8pE-0007N5-NS for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 23 May 2005 09:02:16 +0000 Received: from smtp.founder.com ([218.249.26.6]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Da8p7-0001bY-M7 for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Mon, 23 May 2005 09:02:16 +0000 Received: from founder.com (smtp.founder.com [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.founder.com (8.12.8/8.12.5) with SMTP id j4N91qnW012415 for ; Mon, 23 May 2005 17:01:58 +0800 X-Received: unknown,162.105.184.7,20050523170152 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.founderrd.com) (162.105.184.7) by localhost with SMTP; 23 May 2005 09:01:52 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 17:01:23 +0800 Message-ID: <09881EB3FAB51E47BCFF076FEAFF75F0389F5B@rdmail.rd.founderrd.com> Thread-Topic: write access to live properties Thread-Index: AcVfdf56F9YEG5Q7SA21/+Xk7fWJDw== From: =?gb2312?B?d2FuZ2RvbmcozfW2sCk=?= To: X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1Da8p7-0001bY-M7 9367174dacd399546b9f4b73a93be72b X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: write access to live properties X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/09881EB3FAB51E47BCFF076FEAFF75F0389F5B@rdmail.rd.founderrd.com Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9628 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 09:02:21 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable About live propeties, Rfc2518 said "the value of the property is = maintained by the client, but the server performs syntax checking on submitted values" I wonder which live properties can be "maintained" by a client,I can't = find anything helpful in the RFC2518 .=20 Best wishes Wang From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Mon May 23 05:38:11 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA08279 for ; Mon, 23 May 2005 05:38:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1Da9N9-0002u3-W0 for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 23 May 2005 09:37:19 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Da9N8-0002tB-Of for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 23 May 2005 09:37:18 +0000 Received: from pop.gmx.de ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by bart.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Da9N8-00028d-3o for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Mon, 23 May 2005 09:37:18 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 23 May 2005 09:37:16 -0000 Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.40]) [217.5.201.10] by mail.gmx.net (mp021) with SMTP; 23 May 2005 11:37:16 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <4291A445.80607@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 11:37:09 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?GB2312?B?Indhbmdkb25nKM31trApIg==?= CC: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org References: <09881EB3FAB51E47BCFF076FEAFF75F0389F5B@rdmail.rd.founderrd.com> In-Reply-To: <09881EB3FAB51E47BCFF076FEAFF75F0389F5B@rdmail.rd.founderrd.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=GB2312 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: bart.w3.org 1Da9N8-00028d-3o 0337cf770932130939225f72fa72d47b X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: write access to live properties X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/4291A445.80607@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9629 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 09:37:19 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit wangdong(Íõ¶°) wrote: > About live propeties, Rfc2518 said "the value of the property is maintained by > the client, but the server performs syntax checking on submitted values" > I wonder which live properties can be "maintained" by a client,I can't find > anything helpful in the RFC2518 . RFC2518 doesn't say anything specific here because it depends on the server. For instance, some servers implement DAV:displayname as a protected property that always has the same value as the last path segment minus URI escaping (IMHO a bug). Others allow setting it. Some servers allow setting the DAV:get* properties (such as getcontenttype), other's don't. And so on... At the end of the day, a client will have to try and properly process any kind of status it gets back. Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Tue May 24 09:12:32 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA28255 for ; Tue, 24 May 2005 09:12:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DaZ8o-00014k-Mr for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 24 May 2005 13:08:14 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DaZ8n-00013j-9o for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 24 May 2005 13:08:13 +0000 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.196]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DaZ8l-0000xy-HE for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Tue, 24 May 2005 13:08:15 +0000 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 70so4251092wra for ; Tue, 24 May 2005 06:08:08 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=OpcxRbsZNCQyYOQ61He6RSN/dS5B9PdA2JcKOXQAbSLGGrVsYNIWgPTuZkMLvQxz5TOw+CgGH2VcW/hfWyO7dI7VYLasOk4g8OVGdakGUSUjb2X4g0Xcv89A60fhReOUyex6iYJaUNS69RvZrnVz6B5XH9tV/cUOhNlOBFtDThQ= Received: by 10.54.10.61 with SMTP id 61mr4212679wrj; Tue, 24 May 2005 06:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.51.43 with HTTP; Tue, 24 May 2005 06:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 10:08:08 -0300 From: Alexandre Teixeira Reply-To: Alexandre Teixeira To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1DaZ8l-0000xy-HE 1c03b27bf8d7552a625b6e954840a05a X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: access Exchange contacts information via webdav X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/a81a1b6905052406085650bf45@mail.gmail.com Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9630 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 13:08:14 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, I need to retrive contacts information from mailboxes and public folder of Exchange 2000. I don't know how to use it for C or C++, I've got Onion WebDav library, but there's no documentation. What the ways I can retrive these information from Exchange2000 using WebDad? Thanx --=20 Alex.T. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Tue May 24 20:12:06 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA08333 for ; Tue, 24 May 2005 20:12:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DajTp-0003WU-Jd for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 25 May 2005 00:10:37 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DajTn-0003Vu-BO for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 25 May 2005 00:10:35 +0000 Received: from imap.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by lisa.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DajTj-00041t-K8 for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 25 May 2005 00:10:35 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 25 May 2005 00:10:30 -0000 Received: from p508FAB16.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.178.21]) [80.143.171.22] by mail.gmx.net (mp021) with SMTP; 25 May 2005 02:10:30 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 13:59:19 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lisa Dusseault CC: "'webdav' WG" References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> In-Reply-To: <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1DajTj-00041t-K8 65d02d9976c131ec69caff187f43a1b5 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42931717.8040709@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9631 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 00:10:37 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote: > > A lot of it is described in here: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc- > shepherding-05.txt > > Other details depend on the AD. > Lisa OK, I just read that draft. Questions: a) Is this working group running under this process? If yes, since when? b) Who are the document shepherds for the current working group documents that seem to be ready (BIND, REDIRECT, QUOTA)? c) Section 1 asks...: 1.b) Has the document had adequate review from both key WG members and key non-WG members? Do you have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? How is adequateness determined? And are there any suggestions about how to get review by non-WG members? Speaking of which, how is it decided whether somebody doing a review is or is not a WG member? For instance, when Roy Fielding was giving feedback on specific BIND issues a few months ago, was he doing this as a WG member? (technically, anybody participating in this mailing list is a WG member after all) Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Wed May 25 13:21:01 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA02175 for ; Wed, 25 May 2005 13:21:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DazVg-0000bt-2t for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 25 May 2005 17:17:36 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DazVe-0000ao-E8 for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 25 May 2005 17:17:34 +0000 Received: from kahuna.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DazVZ-0000v7-S8 for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Wed, 25 May 2005 17:17:36 +0000 Old-X-Envelope-From: lisa@osafoundation.org Old-X-Envelope-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([198.144.201.116]) (authenticated bits=0) by kahuna.osafoundation.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4PHHKso023937 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 25 May 2005 10:17:22 -0700 In-Reply-To: <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "'webdav' WG" From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 10:17:13 -0700 To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 127.0.0.1 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1DazVZ-0000v7-S8 6b8563cf0b577c667fb1ac540192b5aa X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9632 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 17:17:36 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On May 24, 2005, at 4:59 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > Lisa Dusseault wrote: >> A lot of it is described in here: >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc- >> shepherding-05.txt >> Other details depend on the AD. >> Lisa > > OK, > > I just read that draft. Questions: > > a) Is this working group running under this process? If yes, since > when? I talk to Ted sometimes about his expectations. We haven't had the need to discuss all the steps of the process, but it's my understanding that Ted expects chairs to sign off on the quality of WG drafts. This kind of thing is also common discussion at IETF meetings so I guess I've kind of absorbed the new expectations without really having specific stuff to announce -- clearly we could have given the mailing-list-only people an earlier, if vague, warning of this. > > b) Who are the document shepherds for the current working group > documents that seem to be ready (BIND, REDIRECT, QUOTA)? I probably would be. > > c) Section 1 asks...: > > 1.b) Has the document had adequate review from both key WG members > and key non-WG members? Do you have any concerns about the > depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? > > How is adequateness determined? And are there any suggestions about > how to get review by non-WG members? Speaking of which, how is it > decided whether somebody doing a review is or is not a WG member? For > instance, when Roy Fielding was giving feedback on specific BIND > issues a few months ago, was he doing this as a WG member? > (technically, anybody participating in this mailing list is a WG > member after all) > The reason I've most commonly heard for review by non-WG members is to get people with broad experience (of different protocols, several standards, several WGs, and of Internet architecture as it relates to several standards) to review documents coming out of WGs, particularly small WGs. If that's the only reason then somebody like Roy certainly qualifies as having broad experience and would be a great reviewer no matter how much they'd participated in the draft and the WG. If, however, the intent is to get a document reviewed by somebody who wasn't involved in design "groupthink" then you'd want somebody fresh to the draft. Lisa From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 26 03:27:46 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA05772 for ; Thu, 26 May 2005 03:27:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DbCjd-0008GD-EU for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 07:24:53 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbCjb-0008Ff-Ek for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 07:24:51 +0000 Received: from imap.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by lisa.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbCjZ-0007Oq-0V for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 07:24:51 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 26 May 2005 07:24:47 -0000 Received: from p508FB05F.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.178.21]) [80.143.176.95] by mail.gmx.net (mp028) with SMTP; 26 May 2005 09:24:47 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 09:24:42 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lisa Dusseault CC: "'webdav' WG" References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> In-Reply-To: <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1DbCjZ-0007Oq-0V 65fe29daf3e2f8fd3451071a7cfc997f X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/429579BA.7050502@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9633 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 07:24:53 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote: > > > On May 24, 2005, at 4:59 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > >> Lisa Dusseault wrote: >> >>> A lot of it is described in here: >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc- >>> shepherding-05.txt >>> Other details depend on the AD. >>> Lisa >> >> >> OK, >> >> I just read that draft. Questions: >> >> a) Is this working group running under this process? If yes, since when? > > > I talk to Ted sometimes about his expectations. We haven't had the need > to discuss all the steps of the process, but it's my understanding that > Ted expects chairs to sign off on the quality of WG drafts. This kind > of thing is also common discussion at IETF meetings so I guess I've kind > of absorbed the new expectations without really having specific stuff to > announce -- clearly we could have given the mailing-list-only people an > earlier, if vague, warning of this. So the answer is "yes, the WG runs under this process"? >> b) Who are the document shepherds for the current working group >> documents that seem to be ready (BIND, REDIRECT, QUOTA)? > > > I probably would be. OK, let me rephrase this: Will the working group chair(s) start shepherding some or all of these documents? If yes, which and when? If no, is there an expectation to the WG to do any specific additional work so they can? > ... Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 26 13:53:42 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA16794 for ; Thu, 26 May 2005 13:53:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DbMWm-0005hR-Jm for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 17:52:16 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbMWl-0005gn-EX for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 17:52:15 +0000 Received: from kahuna.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbMWi-0002W9-PI for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 17:52:15 +0000 Old-X-Envelope-From: lisa@osafoundation.org Old-X-Envelope-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Received: from [192.168.101.178] (w002.z065106067.sjc-ca.dsl.cnc.net [65.106.67.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by kahuna.osafoundation.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4QHpwso001771 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 26 May 2005 10:51:59 -0700 In-Reply-To: <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "'webdav' WG" From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 10:51:51 -0700 To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 127.0.0.1 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1DbMWi-0002W9-PI c282e184d894dbd79752100cc06f4645 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9634 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 17:52:16 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > So the answer is "yes, the WG runs under this process"? I'd say we're approaching this process, yes. I didn't exactly shepherd the ACL draft -- at that time, the IESG wasn't yet including document shepherds in their group discussions -- but I did talk to IESG people directly about their "comment" issues on the ACL draft and found out what would resolve their issues, which is a big part of what a document shepherd is expected to do (rather than rely on the AD to do all the communication between IESG and WG as in the old model). > >>> b) Who are the document shepherds for the current working group >>> documents that seem to be ready (BIND, REDIRECT, QUOTA)? >> I probably would be. > > OK, let me rephrase this: > > Will the working group chair(s) start shepherding some or all of these > documents? If yes, which and when? If no, is there an expectation to > the WG to do any specific additional work so they can? Yes, I am willing to shepherd BIND, REDIRECT, QUOTA and/or RFC2518bis through this process -- provided they meet the bar. For BIND, the document for which we have the most information, we still have underspecified areas and we haven't had the open and exploratory conversations to find out if we can firm those up, but the more difficult hurdle may well be the lack of reviews and implementors. If we don't have the energy as a WG to finish that properly, it's my opinion that we could instead bring BIND immediately to submission as an Informative RFC, where it would be an exemplary and high-quality example of that class. Lisa From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 26 14:51:08 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20861 for ; Thu, 26 May 2005 14:51:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DbNQs-0004ri-46 for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 18:50:14 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbNQq-0004rA-5P for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 18:50:12 +0000 Received: from pop.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by maggie.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbNQo-0007iD-9E for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 18:50:14 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 26 May 2005 18:50:06 -0000 Received: from p508FB05F.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.178.21]) [80.143.176.95] by mail.gmx.net (mp006) with SMTP; 26 May 2005 20:50:06 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <42961A57.9070402@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 20:50:00 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lisa Dusseault CC: "'webdav' WG" References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> In-Reply-To: <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1DbNQo-0007iD-9E fd416d55c0220841c7a165cb99f89d2e X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42961A57.9070402@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9635 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 18:50:14 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote: > ... >> Will the working group chair(s) start shepherding some or all of these >> documents? If yes, which and when? If no, is there an expectation to >> the WG to do any specific additional work so they can? > > > Yes, I am willing to shepherd BIND, REDIRECT, QUOTA and/or RFC2518bis > through this process -- provided they meet the bar. For BIND, the > document for which we have the most information, we still have > underspecified areas and we haven't had the open and exploratory > conversations to find out if we can firm those up, but the more If you think that, you really should either bring them up (if new), or follow-up on the discussions we had on the mailing list. Claiming that there are open issues but not participating in discussing them doesn't seem productive to me. See (for instance): . > difficult hurdle may well be the lack of reviews and implementors. If We've got at least two implementations. How many do we need to for "Proposed"? > we don't have the energy as a WG to finish that properly, it's my > opinion that we could instead bring BIND immediately to submission as > an Informative RFC, where it would be an exemplary and high-quality > example of that class. That would indeed be preferrable to doing nothing at all (although, shouldn't it be "Experimental" instead???); however I personally think that the BIND spec really should be submitted for publication as "Proposed" (in contrast to REDIRECT which *currently* seems to only have one implementation). Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 26 16:10:06 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA05765 for ; Thu, 26 May 2005 16:10:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DbOeB-0001Jb-UE for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 20:08:03 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbOeA-0001J3-Ff for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 20:08:02 +0000 Received: from kahuna.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbOe8-0005Ny-CN for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 20:08:04 +0000 Old-X-Envelope-From: lisa@osafoundation.org Old-X-Envelope-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Received: from [192.168.101.178] (w002.z065106067.sjc-ca.dsl.cnc.net [65.106.67.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by kahuna.osafoundation.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4QK7hso012329 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 26 May 2005 13:07:44 -0700 In-Reply-To: <42961A57.9070402@gmx.de> References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> <42961A57.9070402@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <6b088eb1e34aaec745b5c8f29b34e29c@osafoundation.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "'webdav' WG" From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 13:07:36 -0700 To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 127.0.0.1 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1DbOe8-0005Ny-CN ae7765482e2f5732009bc4801735fd5f X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/6b088eb1e34aaec745b5c8f29b34e29c@osafoundation.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9636 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 20:08:03 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > If you think that, you really should either bring them up (if new), or > follow-up on the discussions we had on the mailing list. Claiming that > there are open issues but not participating in discussing them doesn't > seem productive to me. See (for instance): > 0001.html>. At this point I'm willing to consider the Bind/DeltaV interaction issues to be closed, but I'm not satisfied with the latitude given to servers to behave entirely differently with respect to access control and certain key properties (getlastmodified and getetag), because I can foresee serious interoperability problems and burdens for client implementors. I can keep repeating myself about this, and sometimes do so, but I see little point to get into "Yes it is" "no it isn't" "yes it is" conversations. I tend to simply leave the last email from me as a record of my continuing position. > >> difficult hurdle may well be the lack of reviews and implementors. If > > We've got at least two implementations. How many do we need to for > "Proposed"? That's an excellent question and we may find that there are different answers. For peer-to-peer protocol I'd say 3 implementations in the works, because that means that it's not enough to simply have a bilateral agreement between two implementors -- with three you really need consensus and eventually can test three pairings of implementations. For client/server standards like ours, I'd say two clients and two servers would ideally be in progress by the time you ask for a Proposed Standard. If there's only one server in progress then the whole standard will be geared toward the architecture that one server happens to have. Similarly if there's only one client in progress then there's serious risk that the standard will only reflect one set of use cases and environmental assumptions. If you have no clients in progress then the standard will have a serious bias to reflect the needs of server implementors. I note also that it seems to be difficult to get client implementations underway before an RFC is available (yet other WGs seem to do that) so sometimes it would be appropriate to settle for somewhat less -- e.g. thorough review by experienced client implementors who have considered what it would take to build an implementation and have some plans to do so later. > >> we don't have the energy as a WG to finish that properly, it's my >> opinion that we could instead bring BIND immediately to submission >> as an Informative RFC, where it would be an exemplary and >> high-quality example of that class. > > That would indeed be preferrable to doing nothing at all (although, > shouldn't it be "Experimental" instead???); however I personally think > that the BIND spec really should be submitted for publication as > "Proposed" (in contrast to REDIRECT which *currently* seems to only > have one implementation). Sorry; you're right, Experimental would probably be better. REDIRECT could also go to experimental immediately. Lisa From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 26 16:10:35 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA05987 for ; Thu, 26 May 2005 16:10:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DbOg7-000228-VT for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 20:10:03 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbOg4-0001fS-Rn for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 20:10:00 +0000 Received: from [217.5.201.10] (helo=greenbytes.de) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbOg0-0002z3-Ux for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 20:10:00 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.3] by greenbytes.de (Cipher TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (MDaemon.PRO.v7.2.3.R) with ESMTP id md50000108485.msg for ; Thu, 26 May 2005 22:06:48 +0200 In-Reply-To: <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Julian Reschke , "'webdav' WG" From: Stefan Eissing Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 22:09:25 +0200 To: Lisa Dusseault X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) X-Authenticated-Sender: se@greenbytes.de X-Spam-Processed: greenbytes.de, Thu, 26 May 2005 22:06:48 +0200 (not processed: message from valid local sender) X-MDRemoteIP: 85.72.51.84 X-Return-Path: stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: bart.w3.org 1DbOg0-0002z3-Ux 8b5f356eb3f9d85a14245f6f1feb4732 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/dee637294edf03f297eae458932dfee6@greenbytes.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9637 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 20:10:03 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Am 26.05.2005 um 19:51 schrieb Lisa Dusseault: >> Will the working group chair(s) start shepherding some or all of >> these documents? If yes, which and when? If no, is there an >> expectation to the WG to do any specific additional work so they can? > > Yes, I am willing to shepherd BIND, REDIRECT, QUOTA and/or RFC2518bis > through this process -- provided they meet the bar. For BIND, the > document for which we have the most information, we still have > underspecified areas and we haven't had the open and exploratory > conversations to find out if we can firm those up, but the more > difficult hurdle may well be the lack of reviews and implementors. If > we don't have the energy as a WG to finish that properly, it's my > opinion that we could instead bring BIND immediately to submission as > an Informative RFC, where it would be an exemplary and high-quality > example of that class. I would like to express my extreme dissatisfaction with the WG chairs in handling the BIND spec. I perceive your behaviour during the last year as that of a total roadblock, not constructive and only paying lip service to installing and following any process which might bring progress to WebDAV and its goals. If there is any way to bring this spec to "proposed" under the current chairs, it eludes me. //Stefan From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 26 16:31:13 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA09610 for ; Thu, 26 May 2005 16:31:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DbOzx-0007SN-Dt for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 20:30:33 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbOzr-0007Ri-Fu for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 20:30:27 +0000 Received: from kahuna.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbOzr-00053e-1w for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 20:30:27 +0000 Old-X-Envelope-From: lisa@osafoundation.org Old-X-Envelope-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Received: from [192.168.101.178] (w002.z065106067.sjc-ca.dsl.cnc.net [65.106.67.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by kahuna.osafoundation.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4QKU9so013861 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 26 May 2005 13:30:09 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <1efbe05bdc051a75c7ceae56675c642a@osafoundation.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Julian Reschke , "'webdav' WG" From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 13:30:01 -0700 To: Stefan Eissing X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 127.0.0.1 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: bart.w3.org 1DbOzr-00053e-1w f9d22f64d8fbf2202e3d43c7f262a7d9 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/1efbe05bdc051a75c7ceae56675c642a@osafoundation.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9638 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 20:30:33 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On May 26, 2005, at 1:09 PM, Stefan Eissing wrote: >> > > I would like to express my extreme dissatisfaction with the WG chairs > in handling the BIND spec. I perceive your behaviour during the last > year as that of a total roadblock, not constructive and only paying > lip service to installing and following any process which might bring > progress to WebDAV and its goals. > > If there is any way to bring this spec to "proposed" under the current > chairs, it eludes me. Hi Stefan, Believe me, I can fully understand your frustration here because I'm frustrated as well. I wish I knew what to do. I've tried several things over the past year to try to work through roadblocks, and dragged several other people into the process as well trying to solve problems. It's clear to me as well as to others that those attempts have not worked. I'm not sure what I can do besides assure you that I've made those attempts in good faith. I'm sorry they've been failures and have tried to analyze whether they've been inherent failures, or failures in execution. There may not be a way to bring this spec to proposed under the current arrangement. One of the options I've discussed with Ted Hardie and others has been whether it would be possible to form a new WG from scratch to work on WebDAV extensions. Sometimes with a new WG, there's a great opportunity to get commitments from new volunteers, all starting from the same position and not feeling like they have to work to come up to speed with an existing WG. It's also an opportunity to remix roles, and to have fresh discussions about what the priorities are. Lisa From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Thu May 26 18:56:31 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA21790 for ; Thu, 26 May 2005 18:56:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DbRFk-0004A4-4d for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 22:55:00 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbRFd-00049I-QA for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 22:54:53 +0000 Received: from services.cse.ucsc.edu ([128.114.48.10]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DbRFb-0007l3-Cz for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 22:54:53 +0000 Received: from tycho (dhcp-59-157.cse.ucsc.edu [128.114.59.157]) by services.cse.ucsc.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j4QMslxN019962; Thu, 26 May 2005 15:54:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200505262254.j4QMslxN019962@services.cse.ucsc.edu> Reply-To: From: "Jim Whitehead" To: "''webdav' WG'" Cc: Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 15:54:44 -0700 Organization: UC Santa Cruz MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Thread-Index: AcViMcsVchesWKoOR0WBF+kpKx0abgAEbVOg In-Reply-To: <1efbe05bdc051a75c7ceae56675c642a@osafoundation.org> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1DbRFb-0007l3-Cz fd0394aa4cfaa704a2685a35d85d2f10 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: RE: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/200505262254.j4QMslxN019962@services.cse.ucsc.edu Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9639 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 22:55:00 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit RFC 2026, which as near as I can tell is still the guiding process document for the IETF (I am unable to find another RFC which explicitly obsoletes 2026), in Section 4.1.1 states: A Proposed Standard specification is generally stable, has resolved known design choices, is believed to be well-understood, has received significant community review, and appears to enjoy enough community interest to be considered valuable. However, further experience might result in a change or even retraction of the specification before it advances. Usually, neither implementation nor operational experience is required for the designation of a specification as a Proposed Standard. However, such experience is highly desirable, and will usually represent a strong argument in favor of a Proposed Standard designation. It is my understanding that the BIND specification is "generally stable", that it has indeed "resolved known design choices", is well-understood within the community of activity WG participants, has received numerous reviews over its 5+ year lifetime (and many reviews of its current, final form), and is considered by many in the community to be a valuable specification. I will note that even though the IETF does not require implementation or operational experience, it is my understanding that Julian Reschke has implemented this specification. It would not surprise me if others have as well. I will also note that RFC 2026 explicitly states (section 4.1.1): Implementors should treat Proposed Standards as immature specifications. It is desirable to implement them in order to gain experience and to validate, test, and clarify the specification. I therefore request that the Chairs of this Working Group discharge their duty, as described in Section 6.1.1 of RFC 2026: A standards action is initiated by a recommendation by the IETF Working group responsible for a specification to its Area Director, copied to the IETF Secretariat... That is, please either recommend the specification to the Area Director, and copy it to the Secretariat, or provide a detailed process specifying actions that must be taken by the document editors and/or the Working Group (and justification from RFC 2026 for these actions) for this to happen. - Jim > There may not be a way to bring this spec to proposed under > the current arrangement. One of the options I've discussed > with Ted Hardie and others has been whether it would be > possible to form a new WG from scratch to work on WebDAV > extensions. Sometimes with a new WG, there's a great > opportunity to get commitments from new volunteers, all > starting from the same position and not feeling like they > have to work to come up to speed with an existing WG. It's > also an opportunity to remix roles, and to have fresh > discussions about what the priorities are. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Fri May 27 07:31:45 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA01869 for ; Fri, 27 May 2005 07:31:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1Dbd1X-000219-0w for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 11:29:07 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Dbd1T-00020b-O8 for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 11:29:03 +0000 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]) by lisa.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Dbd1R-00010D-44 for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 11:29:03 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 27 May 2005 11:28:58 -0000 Received: from p508F9060.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.1.40]) [80.143.144.96] by mail.gmx.net (mp001) with SMTP; 27 May 2005 13:28:58 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <42970478.1030102@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 13:28:56 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ejw@soe.ucsc.edu CC: "''webdav' WG'" , hardie@qualcomm.com References: <200505262254.j4QMslxN019962@services.cse.ucsc.edu> In-Reply-To: <200505262254.j4QMslxN019962@services.cse.ucsc.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1Dbd1R-00010D-44 123e852bc922755eac8428880e6d40c2 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42970478.1030102@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9640 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 11:29:07 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim, thanks for reminding us about how the Standards Track is defined. I completely agree that BIND should be submitted as "Proposed". > ... > I will note that even though the IETF does not require implementation or > operational experience, it is my understanding that Julian Reschke has > implemented this specification. It would not surprise me if others have as > well. > ... Let me add that it is also implemented in Apache Slide, see . I'd also like to point out that the damage done in terms of lost interoperability will be far greater if the spec continues to be just another Internet Draft. If Lisa indeed is right in that there are underspecified areas that need fixing (I disagree), this is something that would need to be addressed in a future revision. Let me also point out that one of the most important things for this WG to work on should be RFC2518bis, essentially publishing all the clarifications and simplications the people over here have worked on for many years. The ongoing fighting about specs that are essentially finished provably distracts us from that. Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Fri May 27 08:09:29 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA04726 for ; Fri, 27 May 2005 08:09:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1Dbddk-0002WX-Lr for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 12:08:36 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Dbddh-0002VH-PJ for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 12:08:33 +0000 Received: from pop.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by lisa.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Dbddf-0004WF-6C for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 12:08:33 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 27 May 2005 12:08:29 -0000 Received: from p508F9060.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.1.40]) [80.143.144.96] by mail.gmx.net (mp020) with SMTP; 27 May 2005 14:08:29 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <42970DB7.3020301@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 14:08:23 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lisa Dusseault CC: "'webdav' WG" References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> <42961A57.9070402@gmx.de> <6b088eb1e34aaec745b5c8f29b34e29c@osafoundation.org> In-Reply-To: <6b088eb1e34aaec745b5c8f29b34e29c@osafoundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1Dbddf-0004WF-6C 0eff9089208fba7de2b86df19d3297dc X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: open (?) BIND issues, was: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42970DB7.3020301@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9641 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 12:08:36 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote: > > >> >> If you think that, you really should either bring them up (if new), >> or follow-up on the discussions we had on the mailing list. Claiming >> that there are open issues but not participating in discussing them >> doesn't seem productive to me. See (for instance): >> > 0001.html>. > > > At this point I'm willing to consider the Bind/DeltaV interaction > issues to be closed, but I'm not satisfied with the latitude given to > servers to behave entirely differently with respect to access control > and certain key properties (getlastmodified and getetag), because I can > foresee serious interoperability problems and burdens for client > implementors. I can keep repeating myself about this, and sometimes do > so, but I see little point to get into "Yes it is" "no it isn't" "yes > it is" conversations. I tend to simply leave the last email from me as > a record of my continuing position. Lisa, this isn't helpful. Jim W. and I had a long brainstorming on this issue; and I have written down what we talked about. Both Jim and I spent a considerable amount of time to get there. Again, this is in . It would be very nice if you could *read* that summary and follow up once you've done that. I'd also like to point out that you seem the be the single WG member who still has objections, so there *is* broad consensus on this issue. >>> difficult hurdle may well be the lack of reviews and implementors. If >> >> >> We've got at least two implementations. How many do we need to for >> "Proposed"? > > > That's an excellent question and we may find that there are different > answers. For peer-to-peer protocol I'd say 3 implementations in the > works, because that means that it's not enough to simply have a > bilateral agreement between two implementors -- with three you really > need consensus and eventually can test three pairings of > implementations. For client/server standards like ours, I'd say two > clients and two servers would ideally be in progress by the time you > ask for a Proposed Standard. If there's only one server in progress > then the whole standard will be geared toward the architecture that one > server happens to have. Similarly if there's only one client in > progress then there's serious risk that the standard will only reflect > one set of use cases and environmental assumptions. If you have no > clients in progress then the standard will have a serious bias to > reflect the needs of server implementors. Could you please clarify where the requirement for implementations actually comes from? > ... Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Fri May 27 08:22:56 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA05606 for ; Fri, 27 May 2005 08:22:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1Dbdqx-0006aB-Gp for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 12:22:15 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Dbdqw-0006ZX-K2 for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 12:22:14 +0000 Received: from pop.gmx.de ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by lisa.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Dbdqt-0005i7-Rz for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 12:22:14 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 27 May 2005 12:22:10 -0000 Received: from p508F9060.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.1.40]) [80.143.144.96] by mail.gmx.net (mp002) with SMTP; 27 May 2005 14:22:10 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <429710EF.6020106@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 14:22:07 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lisa Dusseault CC: "'webdav' WG" References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> <42961A57.9070402@gmx.de> <6b088eb1e34aaec745b5c8f29b34e29c@osafoundation.org> In-Reply-To: <6b088eb1e34aaec745b5c8f29b34e29c@osafoundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1Dbdqt-0005i7-Rz 97f66f1204d817cd3a605b9a61fdbd5c X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: REDIRECT, was: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/429710EF.6020106@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9642 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 12:22:15 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote: > ... >>> we don't have the energy as a WG to finish that properly, it's my >>> opinion that we could instead bring BIND immediately to submission >>> as an Informative RFC, where it would be an exemplary and >>> high-quality example of that class. >> >> >> That would indeed be preferrable to doing nothing at all (although, >> shouldn't it be "Experimental" instead???); however I personally >> think that the BIND spec really should be submitted for publication >> as "Proposed" (in contrast to REDIRECT which *currently* seems to >> only have one implementation). > > > Sorry; you're right, Experimental would probably be better. REDIRECT > could also go to experimental immediately. I'd prefer it to go to "Proposed" (that seems in line with the Standards Process). Anyway, if you feel it's done, why don't you start a WG last call for it? Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Fri May 27 09:26:25 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA10279 for ; Fri, 27 May 2005 09:26:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1Dbeps-0005DQ-5s for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 13:25:12 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Dbepo-0005Cm-Hb for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 13:25:08 +0000 Received: from mail.gmx.de ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by bart.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Dbepn-0007cv-UE for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 13:25:08 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 27 May 2005 13:25:05 -0000 Received: from p508F9060.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.1.40]) [80.143.144.96] by mail.gmx.net (mp007) with SMTP; 27 May 2005 15:25:05 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <42971FAE.1040806@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 15:25:02 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lisa Dusseault CC: Stefan Eissing , "'webdav' WG" References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> <1efbe05bdc051a75c7ceae56675c642a@osafoundation.org> In-Reply-To: <1efbe05bdc051a75c7ceae56675c642a@osafoundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: bart.w3.org 1Dbepn-0007cv-UE d96ee9d5d1579d32ce0e111edef16949 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/42971FAE.1040806@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9643 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 13:25:12 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote: > ... > There may not be a way to bring this spec to proposed under the current > arrangement. One of the options I've discussed with Ted Hardie and > others has been whether it would be possible to form a new WG from > scratch to work on WebDAV extensions. Sometimes with a new WG, there's > a great opportunity to get commitments from new volunteers, all starting > from the same position and not feeling like they have to work to come up > to speed with an existing WG. It's also an opportunity to remix roles, > and to have fresh discussions about what the priorities are. > I have trouble understanding how this could with those specs we have esentially finished. Are you seriously proposing to throw that stuff away and to restart from scratch? Best regards, Julian From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Fri May 27 16:14:19 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA29815 for ; Fri, 27 May 2005 16:14:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DblCK-0006TB-Dh for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 20:12:48 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DblCG-0006SL-Cb for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 20:12:44 +0000 Received: from numenor.qualcomm.com ([129.46.51.58]) by bart.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DblCE-00026X-Pp for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 20:12:44 +0000 Received: from sabrina.qualcomm.com (sabrina.qualcomm.com [129.46.61.150]) by numenor.qualcomm.com (8.12.10/8.12.5/1.0) with ESMTP id j4RKCaCK016570 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 27 May 2005 13:12:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.46.227.161] (carbuncle.qualcomm.com [129.46.227.161]) by sabrina.qualcomm.com (8.12.10/8.12.5/1.0) with ESMTP id j4RKCYbS015997; Fri, 27 May 2005 13:12:35 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 13:12:33 -0700 To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org From: Ted Hardie Cc: Scott Hollenbeck Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: bart.w3.org 1DblCE-00026X-Pp 548aeb3b3acd0eff280ccf2370d88718 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Working group process and the future of the WG. X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/p06210203bebd1eef652a@%5B129.46.227.161%5D Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9644 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 20:12:48 +0000 Several folks have asked where the discussion of the updated role of the WG Chair is documented. This is an output of the PROTO team in the General area, and it is documented in http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc-shepherding-05.txt. Though this is not yet an RFC, the IESG agreed to work using these rules on an interim basis in February, and Scott Hollenbeck announced that the APPs area would be using it at the most recent Minneapolis IETF. As most of you know, I was not at the meeting because of family commitments, but he did so with my full agreement. Though this updates the methodologies by which a working group chair and AD split the work of shepherding, it in some ways codifies the way good working groups have always worked--active working group chairs have always been involved in assuring that adequate review inside and outside the working group has been completed, that issues raised in Last Call or in IESG deliberation are handled, and so. It has also long been the case that the IESG's reading of RFC 2418 on the role of the WG chair has seen a Working Group chair as responsible for assuring the community that a document put forward to meet a working group milestone is appropriate to the task (see Section 6.1). Chairs can do that in multiple ways, but their own technical judgement is always expected to form a part of that assessment. It is entirely appropriate for a chair to state a technical problem with a spec and expect the working group and editors to either resolve the problem or document why the problem isn't an issue (usually in the spec). In cases where the working group chair has to call whether or not there is working group consensus on a particular resolution to a technical issue raised in this way, we can run into problems. The usual way of doing that is to have at least two chairs, so that one can handle the process call for technical issues raised by the other. That strategy has been in place for this group since I came on as AD, though I have to say a series of time commitment issues has made it very hard to implement: Jim had very few cycles at the time he stepped down; Patrik had to withdraw very shortly after agreeing to take the role; Joe has had issues with his organization supporting the time required. Joe attempted to augment the usual mechanism by implementing a ticketing system, but those using it seem to have plural opinions even on what it takes to close a ticket so that it takes more, rather than less, effort to use it effectively. The forward progress in the face of that strategy's failure has not been great. At this point, I want to reiterate that Lisa's actions as Chair have been both within my expectations as the AD for the group and that they have had my support; we have discussed the working group's progress on many occasions and the actions she and her co-chairs have taken have had gone forward with my knowledge and consent. She would be the first, I believe, to agree we have a problem in making forward progress. She's also had the brunt of trying to resolve it, and I thank her for her efforts. The question I have now is how to make that progress when the existing strategy has failed multiple times. We can change chairs, of course, and this might help clarify the process role vs. the contributor roles. I am concerned, though, that is will not be enough given the very small size of the working group's active membership. Judging rough consensus on a technical topic among only a few people when even one disagrees is tricky; if you solve that problem by ensuring that the chair has sufficient technical depth in the subject to adjudicate, you are back exactly where we are now. We can decide that the problem of size does not admit of solution, and we can shut down the working group. This leaves a lot of WebDav's published specs augmented by unpublished "lore" that is needed to get things done. I'm not thrilled by that, but if there is no way to get further, we may have to do it. I will be very reluctant to accept individual submissions for the standards track on WebDav core issues if we go this route, since that forces the IESG to resolve issues the WG could not. It might happen, but it would take work on the part of the proposers that is probably easier to accomplish in a working group setting. We can also try to radically limit what the working group is trying to accomplish and set out a firm deadline, after which the working group MUST shut down. This helps focus energy and may encourage folks who cannot commit to long term energy to commit to the short term working group program. If we go this route, I strongly suggest the working group consider a very draconian approach to reaching compromise. One example I have seen outside the IETF that worked was to say that if an issue could not be resolved within a set period of time, the whole document involved sank to the bottom of the WG's agenda--so everyone is clear that the failure to compromise may mean that the document does not get out at all. This requires a great deal of discipline and forces everyone to ask a new question ("Is this issue big enough that the document should not go forward at all if it is not fixed"). It can, however, work to get out the documents for which the WG is close to consensus and to focus work on others. I'd like to see the working group discuss these or other future paths. I do remind folks to remain professional in their discussion and that ad hominem comments are not tolerated; please think constructively about what *you* can do to move us forward and especially about what commitments *you* can take on. regards, Ted Hardie as Area Advisor. From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sat May 28 18:57:31 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA10742 for ; Sat, 28 May 2005 18:57:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DcAD4-0003Cs-Hd for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 28 May 2005 22:55:14 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DcAD0-0003Am-1l for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 28 May 2005 22:55:10 +0000 Received: from laweleka.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98] helo=kahuna.osafoundation.org) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DcACx-0000WO-8A for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sat, 28 May 2005 22:55:09 +0000 Old-X-Envelope-From: lisa@osafoundation.org Old-X-Envelope-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([198.144.201.116]) (authenticated bits=0) by kahuna.osafoundation.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4SMseso006643 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 28 May 2005 15:54:43 -0700 In-Reply-To: <42971FAE.1040806@gmx.de> References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> <1efbe05bdc051a75c7ceae56675c642a@osafoundation.org> <42971FAE.1040806@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <2ceb6bbbb2d55649a484b74698e38d53@osafoundation.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "'webdav' WG" , Stefan Eissing From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 15:54:33 -0700 To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 127.0.0.1 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1DcACx-0000WO-8A 61ba77cfc682beecfd828dd36de75338 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/2ceb6bbbb2d55649a484b74698e38d53@osafoundation.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9645 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 22:55:14 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Were a new working group to be formed to work on WebDAV extensions, I personally wouldn't be making proposals for what to do with that stuff. What would matter would be what the new WG decided was most important to work on, and if that had overlap with pre-existing work, then whether to work from pre-existing drafts. If the bind, redirect and search features turn out to be important enough to garner sufficient support, then I expect those supporters would very likely want to work from the existing drafts and implementations. Progress might then be very quick (again assuming sufficient support). I'm still working with Ted to see if the current WG can be kept open and working, but if there's more support to shut down the WG than there is to keep it open, that would be good to know sooner rather than later -- it isn't too late for somebody to plan a BOF for Paris. Lisa On May 27, 2005, at 6:25 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > > Lisa Dusseault wrote: >> ... >> There may not be a way to bring this spec to proposed under the >> current arrangement. One of the options I've discussed with Ted >> Hardie and others has been whether it would be possible to form a new >> WG from scratch to work on WebDAV extensions. Sometimes with a new >> WG, there's a great opportunity to get commitments from new >> volunteers, all starting from the same position and not feeling like >> they have to work to come up to speed with an existing WG. It's also >> an opportunity to remix roles, and to have fresh discussions about >> what the priorities are. > > I have trouble understanding how this could with those specs we have > esentially finished. Are you seriously proposing to throw that stuff > away and to restart from scratch? > > Best regards, Julian > From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sat May 28 19:11:36 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA11207 for ; Sat, 28 May 2005 19:11:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DcASJ-000785-8N for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 28 May 2005 23:10:59 +0000 Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DcASE-00077U-Ie for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 28 May 2005 23:10:54 +0000 Received: from laweleka.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98] helo=kahuna.osafoundation.org) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DcASC-0001Qz-6S for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sat, 28 May 2005 23:10:54 +0000 Old-X-Envelope-From: lisa@osafoundation.org Old-X-Envelope-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([198.144.201.116]) (authenticated bits=0) by kahuna.osafoundation.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4SNAhso006879 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 28 May 2005 16:10:46 -0700 In-Reply-To: <429710EF.6020106@gmx.de> References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> <42961A57.9070402@gmx.de> <6b088eb1e34aaec745b5c8f29b34e29c@osafoundation.org> <429710EF.6020106@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "'webdav' WG" From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 16:10:37 -0700 To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 127.0.0.1 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1DcASC-0001Qz-6S 7605efffb58e9152c2cbcd0949bc5c6f X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: REDIRECT, was: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/a8886cd9f21ab4f5db8500241b3dea53@osafoundation.org Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9646 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 23:10:59 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Julian, In WG meeting notes posted March 9 2004 : "Redirect: No major issues -- but no recent activity. OTOH, there may not be many implementors. Perhaps we can last call and require a minimum # of reviews." I didn't press the issue because I recalled it being your stated intention that you preferred to finish Binding first. Then on April 8 2004 you sent revision 07 of Redirect and said: "This draft reflects the current state and is work-in-progress." Do you consider Redirect to not be a work-in-progress any more? If so, do you have diffs (from 06, perhaps) handy so we can gauge the extent of changes? Once we resolve the status of the WG, I'd support a last-call with a minimum # of reviews solicited. Lisa On May 27, 2005, at 5:22 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > > Lisa Dusseault wrote: >> ... >>>> we don't have the energy as a WG to finish that properly, it's my >>>> opinion that we could instead bring BIND immediately to submission >>>> as an Informative RFC, where it would be an exemplary and >>>> high-quality example of that class. >>> >>> >>> That would indeed be preferrable to doing nothing at all (although, >>> shouldn't it be "Experimental" instead???); however I personally >>> think that the BIND spec really should be submitted for publication >>> as "Proposed" (in contrast to REDIRECT which *currently* seems to >>> only have one implementation). >> Sorry; you're right, Experimental would probably be better. REDIRECT >> could also go to experimental immediately. > > I'd prefer it to go to "Proposed" (that seems in line with the > Standards Process). Anyway, if you feel it's done, why don't you start > a WG last call for it? > > Best regards, Julian > From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 29 06:01:32 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA06372 for ; Sun, 29 May 2005 06:01:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DcKaK-0006Gl-Nk for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 29 May 2005 09:59:56 +0000 Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DcKaF-0006G7-Jl for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 29 May 2005 09:59:51 +0000 Received: from pop.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by maggie.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DcKaC-0006az-De for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sun, 29 May 2005 09:59:53 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 29 May 2005 09:59:44 -0000 Received: from p508F8432.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.178.21]) [80.143.132.50] by mail.gmx.net (mp004) with SMTP; 29 May 2005 11:59:44 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <4299928D.5010405@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 11:59:41 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lisa Dusseault CC: "'webdav' WG" References: <200504271955.PAA19564@ietf.org> <42766878.5050402@cse.ucsc.edu> <42768620.1040209@gmx.de> <42794D1A.6060701@briank.com> <4279E627.9070808@gmx.de> <428C3EE6.7050801@gmx.de> <74aceac04bcd06395d504a6c9241adab@osafoundation.org> <42931717.8040709@gmx.de> <8d5ab313b86880ea8027407ccea11ea8@osafoundation.org> <429579BA.7050502@gmx.de> <2db438e88c0864fd2680e32ead86600e@osafoundation.org> <42961A57.9070402@gmx.de> <6b088eb1e34aaec745b5c8f29b34e29c@osafoundation.org> <429710EF.6020106@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1DcKaC-0006az-De ceb0fae1a4594e2af81a2ccc45dc9d05 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: REDIRECT, was: WG process (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-quota-07.txt) X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/4299928D.5010405@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9647 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 09:59:56 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Dusseault wrote: > > Hi Julian, > > In WG meeting notes posted March 9 2004 > : > > "Redirect: No major issues -- but no recent activity. OTOH, there may > not be many implementors. Perhaps we can last call and require a > minimum # of reviews." > > I didn't press the issue because I recalled it being your stated > intention that you preferred to finish Binding first. Then on April 8 As far as I am concerned, BIND is finished (meaning that depending of how one judges the current situation, either all issues have indeed been resolved, or resolution of these issues is pending until those how raised the issues come back discussing them). > 2004 0037.html> you sent revision 07 of Redirect and said: > > "This draft reflects the current state and is work-in-progress." You may have missed that since then four more drafts have been posted (). > Do you consider Redirect to not be a work-in-progress any more? If so, > do you have diffs (from 06, perhaps) handy so we can gauge the extent > of changes? Once we resolve the status of the WG, I'd support a > last-call with a minimum # of reviews solicited. As far as I can tell, it's done, otherwise I wouldn't ask for Last Call. Back in February I wrote (): "B3. REDIRECT As far as I can tell, we (greenbytes) are the only ones actively working on this (both spec and implementation). I think the spec is very close to be finished; but I would prefer to have it fully implemented before proceeding." The meeting minutes for the last meeting () say: "REDIRECT Redirect draft: progress waiting on author's implementation (Netweaver again) to push forward)" ...and this is what happened. All changes are summarized in an appendix of the text version (see below); marked-up diffs with the changes between the individual drafts are available from our web site: Best regards, Julian - snip - Appendix A. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication) A.1 Since draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-02 Julian Reschke takes editorial role (added to authors list). Cleanup XML indentation. Start adding all unresolved last call issues. Update some author's contact information. Update references, split into "normative" and "informational". Remove non-RFC2616 headers ("Public") from examples. Fixed width problems in artwork. Start resolving editorial issues. A.2 Since draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-03 Added Joe Orton and Juergen Reuter to Acknowledgements section. Close more editorial issues. Remove dependencies on BIND spec. A.3 Since draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-04 More editorial fixes. Clarify that MKRESOURCE can only be used to create redirect references (switch to new method in a future draft). Clarify that redirect references do not have bodies. A.4 Since draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-05 Close (accept) issue "lc-79-accesscontrol". Add issue "rfc2606- compliance". Close issues "lc-50-blindredirect", "lc-71-relative", "lc-74-terminology". Update contact info for Geoff Clemm. Moved some of the original authors names to new Contributors section. Add and close issue "9-MKRESOURCE-vs-relative-URI". Close issue "lc-72- trailingslash". Close issue "lc-60-ex". Update issue "lc-85-301" with proposal. Close issue "lc-06-reftarget-relative" (9-MKRESOURCE- vs-relative-URI was a duplicate of this one). Also remove section 9.1 (example for MKRESOURCE vs relative URIs). Add and resolve issue "11.2-apply-to-redirect-ref-syntax" (header now has values "T" and "F"). Also some cleanup for "rfc2606-compliance". Typo fixes. Add and resolve "15.1-options-response". A.5 Since draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-06 Resolve issues "lc-19-direct-ref", "lc-28-lang", "lc-29-lang", "lc- 44-pseudo", "lc-53-s10", "lc-61-pseudo", "lc-63-move", "lc-80-i18n" and "rfc2606-compliance". Start work on index. Add new issue "old_clients". A.6 Since draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-07 Closed issue "lc-38-not-hierarchical". Cleaned up DTD fragments in appendix. Close (reject) issues "lc-55-iana" and "lc-41-no-webdav". Add issue "5_mkresource" and start work on MKREDIRECTREF (issue closed, but more work on MKREDIRECTREF needs to be done for updates and status codes other than 302). Start resolution of "lc-85-301", replacing "302" by more generic language. Update issue "lc-57- noautoupdate". Close issue "lc-37-integrity" (duplicate of "lc-57- autoupdate"). Started work on "lc-85-301". Add L. Dusseault and S. Eissing to Acknowledgments section. A.7 Since draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-08 Fix index entries for conditions. Open and resolve issue "specify_safeness". Rewrite editorial section and parts of intro. Add more clarifications for issue "lc-85-301" and close it. A.8 Since draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-09 Resolve issues "lc-33-forwarding", "lc-36-server" and "lc-57- noautoupdate". Close issues "lc-48-s6", "12.1-property-name", "3-terminology-redirectref" and "lc-58-update". Rearrange section 5 and 6. Add some more terms to index (no change tracking). A.9 Since draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-10 Add and resolve issues "13_allprop" and "rfc2396bis". Use the term "Request-URI" throughout (this is what RFC2616 defines). Center some of the artwork. Add and resolve issue "abnf". A.10 Since draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-11 Re-open and close issue "anbf" (implied LWS). Raise and close issue "frag_in_target". Add precondition name for legal reftarget element contents. Enhance index. Add and close issue "dtd-changes". From w3c-dist-auth-request@frink.w3.org Sun May 29 10:42:39 2005 Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA20158 for ; Sun, 29 May 2005 10:42:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DcOxm-0007Zw-GE for w3c-dist-auth-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 29 May 2005 14:40:26 +0000 Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.40]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DcOxj-0007Yv-74 for w3c-dist-auth@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 29 May 2005 14:40:23 +0000 Received: from imap.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by bart.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DcOxi-0007G9-LX for w3c-dist-auth@w3.org; Sun, 29 May 2005 14:40:23 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 29 May 2005 14:40:21 -0000 Received: from p508F8432.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.178.21]) [80.143.132.50] by mail.gmx.net (mp028) with SMTP; 29 May 2005 16:40:21 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 Message-ID: <4299D446.2050401@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 16:40:06 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ted Hardie CC: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org, Scott Hollenbeck References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: bart.w3.org 1DcOxi-0007G9-LX 7e94a8af2f7a4dd56edb211cef8df7e7 X-Original-To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: Working group process and the future of the WG. X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/4299D446.2050401@gmx.de Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9648 X-Loop: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Resent-Message-Id: Resent-Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 14:40:26 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ted, thanks for the summary. Below a few thoughts and clarifications...: PROTO I absolutely agree that the PROTO procedures make a lot of sense, in particular the requirements to come up with a detailed write-up when a document is to be submitted. If the WG chairs feel that they need help in collecting and summarizing this information, they should point that out, so that the WG can assist. Ticketing System I explicitly disagree on the comments about the ticketing system that was installed by Joe H. As far as I can tell, we had a WG consensus on how to use it for the WG Last Call for BIND, but for some reasons the WG chairs at some point decided not to follow that procedure anymore (without actually stating that). Reminder: that procedure was defined in , and as far as those rules are concerned, the BIND spec finished last call successfully. It would be really good if the WG chairs would either acknowledge this, or, alternatively, spell out exactly what they think is left to do. WG future I think it makes sense to distinguish different types of drafts the WG is currently working on. Group #1: Advanced Collections BIND and REDIRECT have been through a WG last call back in 2000 (as their sibling ORDERED COLLECTIONS, which we successfully finished in 2003). Both specs are stable in that their authors are not aware of any open issues and in that there are implementations out there. As mentioned before, BIND went through a second WG last call in January. At this point, the WG needs to decide whether these specs should be published through the WG at all, and if so, at which level. Not publishing these specs at all IMHO will negatively affect interoperability of existing implementations, though. BIND is currently implemented in (at least) two server projects (one of which open source), and one client. Looking at the RFC Standards Process (as pointed out by Jim W on Friday), it really falls into the "Proposed" category. REDIRECT is currently implemented in (at least) one server and two clients (one of which only implements discovery, but not creation of redirects). Again, this spec seems to fall into the "Proposed" category. On the other hand, if we can't get consensus for publication as "Proposed", I think it would be the right thing to do publish as "Experimental". Not publishing at all clearly harms interoperability and causes valuable information to disappear from the set of documentation implementers usually can find. Group #2: Quota This spec has been added (without prior discussion) to the WG's work items; and has been extremely slow progressing. It now has reached a status without known issues. Unfortunately (but not surprising giving the very slow speed it has progressed), both authors do not work anymore for their respective companies, so what we should do is to find out whether the current document actually meets the requirements of those who originally wanted it (Xythos and Apple; as far as I can tell, we already got a nod from Apple's Jim Luther in ). Group #3: RFC2518bis This is certainly the most important piece of work. It's really frustrating that all the effort spent on clarifications and simplifications (in particular for locking) hasn't led to a publication yet. For instance, just a few weeks ago the Subversion developers wasted a lot of time trying to implement the deprecated lock null resource semantics. I have offered by help in getting things done multiple times; and now that BIND and REDIRECT seem to be done I'm really looking for that. To summarize: I personally think that the problems this WG has are caused by - Draft editors responding too slow to issues (or not responding at all), and - inability of the WG to manage the document submission once the technical and editorial work is done (meaning to either actually submit the document, or to precisely point out what's left to do). If we fix these problems, we can submit BIND/QUOTA/REDIRECT quickly, and then focus all of our energy to get RFC2518bis done. Best regards, Julian