Ticket #27 (closed editorial: fixed)
|Reported by:||email@example.com||Owned by:|
|Component:||p2-semantics||Severity:||Active WG Document|
It *appears* that RFC3253 changes the idempotency of PUT; is this allowed? RFC3253 doesn't update or obsolete 2616...
I can see a situation where a 3253-naive client decides to retry a timed-out PUT (after all, it's idempotent) and gets some side effects it didn't bargain for.
- version set to d00
- Component set to semantics
- Milestone set to unassigned
- Priority set to normal
- Type changed from design to editorial
- Severity set to Active WG Document
- Summary changed from PUT Idempotency to Idempotency