Subject: status code 425

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 19:11:21 +0200

Hi,

I just found in <http://www.iana.org/assignments/http-status-codes>:

> 425       Reserved for WebDAV advanced             [RFC2817]
>           collections expired proposal

RFC 2817 says 
(<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2817.html#rfc.section.7.1>):

 > 3. WebDAV Advanced Collections [5] (Work in Progress) [defines 425]

where [5] is:

>    [5]  Slein, J., Whitehead, E.J., et al., "WebDAV Advanced Collections
>         Protocol",  Work In Progress.

...which of course isn't *that* helpful (RFC Editor, you listening? :-)

Anyway, this seems to come from 
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-webdav-collection-protocol-04#section-7.2> 
which says:

> 7.2 425 Unordered Collection
>
>
> The 425 (Unordered Collection) status code indicates that the client
> attempted to set the position of an internal collection member in an
> unordered collection or in a collection with a server-maintained
> ordering.

That draft was never finished, but RFC 3648 ("Web Distributed Authoring 
and Versioning (WebDAV) Ordered Collections Protocol") was. That uses 
the precondition name "DAV:collection-must-be-ordered" instead 
(<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc3648.html#rfc.section.6.1>).

I don't believe anybody has implemented status code 425.

Maybe we should un-reserve it in the IANA registry?

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Cyrus Daboo <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 14:12:14 -0400

Hi Julian,

--On July 20, 2010 7:11:21 PM +0200 Julian Reschke <[email-masked]> 
wrote:

> and Versioning (WebDAV) Ordered Collections Protocol") was. That uses the
> precondition name "DAV:collection-must-be-ordered" instead

+1.

Speaking of RFC 3648, have implementations of that been done? How would a 
server signal to a client that just the order of child resources in the 
collection has changed, but not the actual resource bodies? It would be 
really handy if the server could send a "diff" of the ordering changes to 
not require the client to do a depth:1 PROPFIND (which the sync REPORT 
seeks to reduce use of).

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 20:27:35 +0200

On 20.07.2010 20:12, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
> ...
> Speaking of RFC 3648, have implementations of that been done? How would

Yes.

> a server signal to a client that just the order of child resources in
> the collection has changed, but not the actual resource bodies? It would
> be really handy if the server could send a "diff" of the ordering
> changes to not require the client to do a depth:1 PROPFIND (which the
> sync REPORT seeks to reduce use of).

The issue never came up :-)

Do you believe that a PROPFIND with Depth:1 (and not using allprop) is 
expensive? It might be for large collections, but those are expensive in 
WebDAV anyway...

BR, Julian