draft-ietf-webdav-bind-12.txt   draft-ietf-webdav-bind-13.txt 
Network Working Group G. Clemm Network Working Group G. Clemm
Internet-Draft IBM Internet-Draft IBM
Updates: 2518 (if approved) J. Crawford Updates: J. Crawford
Expires: January 15, 2006 IBM Research draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis (if IBM Research
J. Reschke approved) J. Reschke
greenbytes Expires: August 12, 2006 greenbytes
J. Whitehead J. Whitehead
U.C. Santa Cruz U.C. Santa Cruz
July 14, 2005 February 8, 2006
Binding Extensions to Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV) Binding Extensions to Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV)
draft-ietf-webdav-bind-12 draft-ietf-webdav-bind-13
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
skipping to change at page 1, line 39 skipping to change at page 1, line 39
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 15, 2006. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 12, 2006.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
Abstract Abstract
This specification defines bindings, and the BIND method for creating This specification defines bindings, and the BIND method for creating
multiple bindings to the same resource. Creating a new binding to a multiple bindings to the same resource. Creating a new binding to a
resource causes at least one new URI to be mapped to that resource. resource causes at least one new URI to be mapped to that resource.
Servers are required to insure the integrity of any bindings that Servers are required to insure the integrity of any bindings that
they allow to be created. they allow to be created.
skipping to change at page 2, line 23 skipping to change at page 2, line 23
<mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org>. Discussions of the WEBDAV <mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org>. Discussions of the WEBDAV
working group are archived at working group are archived at
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/>. <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/>.
<http://www.webdav.org/bind/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-issues.html> lists <http://www.webdav.org/bind/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-issues.html> lists
all registered issues since draft 02. all registered issues since draft 02.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1 Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2 Rationale for Distinguishing Bindings from URI Mappings . 6 1.2. Rationale for Distinguishing Bindings from URI Mappings . 6
1.3 Method Preconditions and Postconditions . . . . . . . . . 7 1.3. Method Preconditions and Postconditions . . . . . . . . . 7
2. Overview of Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2. Overview of Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1 Bindings to Collections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.1. Bindings to Collections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1.1 Bind loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.1.1. Bind loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 URI Mappings Created by a new Binding . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.2. URI Mappings Created by a new Binding . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3 COPY and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.3. COPY and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3.1 Example: COPY with 'Depth: infinity' in presence 2.3.1. Example: COPY with 'Depth: infinity' in presence
of bind loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 of bind loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.2 Example: COPY with 'Depth: infinity' with multiple 2.3.2. Example: COPY with 'Depth: infinity' with multiple
bindings to a leaf resource . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 bindings to a leaf resource . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.4 DELETE and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.4. DELETE and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.5 MOVE and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.5. MOVE and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.6 PROPFIND and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 2.6. PROPFIND and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.7 UNLOCK and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.7. Determining Whether Two Bindings Are to the Same
2.8 Determining Whether Two Bindings Are to the Same Resource . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Resource . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.8. Discovering the Bindings to a Resource . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.9 Discovering the Bindings to a Resource . . . . . . . . . . 17 3. Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3. Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3.1. DAV:resource-id Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1 DAV:resource-id Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3.2. DAV:parent-set Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.2 DAV:parent-set Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3.2.1. Example for DAV:parent-set property . . . . . . . . . 17
3.2.1 Example for DAV:parent-set property . . . . . . . . . 19 4. BIND Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4. BIND Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.1. Example: BIND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.1 Example: BIND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 5. UNBIND Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5. UNBIND Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 5.1. Example: UNBIND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.1 Example: UNBIND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 6. REBIND Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6. REBIND Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 6.1. Example: REBIND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.1 Example: REBIND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 6.2. Example: REBIND in presence of locks and bind loops . . . 26
6.2 Example: REBIND in presence of locks and bind loops . . . 27 7. Additional Status Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7. Additional Status Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 7.1. 208 Already Reported . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.1 208 Already Reported . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 7.1.1. Example: PROPFIND by bind-aware client . . . . . . . . 29
7.1.1 Example: PROPFIND by bind-aware client . . . . . . . . 30 7.1.2. Example: PROPFIND by non-bind-aware client . . . . . . 31
7.1.2 Example: PROPFIND by non-bind-aware client . . . . . . 32 7.2. 506 Loop Detected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7.2 506 Loop Detected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 8. Capability discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
8. Capability discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 8.1. OPTIONS method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
8.1 OPTIONS method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 8.2. 'DAV' request header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
8.2 'DAV' request header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 9. Relationship to WebDAV Access Control Protocol . . . . . . . . 32
8.2.1 Generic syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
8.2.2 Client compliance class 'bind' . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 10.1. Privacy Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
9. Relationship to WebDAV Access Control Protocol . . . . . . . . 33 10.2. Bind Loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 10.3. Bindings, and Denial of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
10.1 Privacy Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 10.4. Private Locations May Be Revealed . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
10.2 Bind Loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 10.5. DAV:parent-set and Denial of Service . . . . . . . . . . . 33
10.3 Bindings, and Denial of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 11. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
10.4 Private Locations May Be Revealed . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
10.5 DAV:parent-set and Denial of Service . . . . . . . . . . . 34 13. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
11. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
13. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 14.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Appendix A. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before
14.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
14.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 A.1. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 A.2. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
A. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication) . 36 A.3. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
A.1 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 A.4. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
A.2 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 A.5. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
A.3 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 A.6. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
A.4 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 A.7. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
A.5 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 A.8. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
A.6 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 A.9. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
A.7 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 A.10. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
A.8 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 A.11. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
A.9 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Appendix B. Resolved issues (to be removed by RFC Editor
A.10 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 before publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
B. Open issues (to be removed by RFC Editor prior to B.1. ED_updates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Appendix C. Open issues (to be removed by RFC Editor prior to
B.1 edit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 C.1. edit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 41 C.2. webdav-rev . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 42
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This specification extends the WebDAV Distributed Authoring Protocol This specification extends the WebDAV Distributed Authoring Protocol
to enable clients to create new access paths to existing resources. ([draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis]) to enable clients to create new
This capability is useful for several reasons: access paths to existing resources. This capability is useful for
several reasons:
URIs of WebDAV-compliant resources are hierarchical and correspond to URIs of WebDAV-compliant resources are hierarchical and correspond to
a hierarchy of collections in resource space. The WebDAV Distributed a hierarchy of collections in resource space. The WebDAV Distributed
Authoring Protocol makes it possible to organize these resources into Authoring Protocol makes it possible to organize these resources into
hierarchies, placing them into groupings, known as collections, which hierarchies, placing them into groupings, known as collections, which
are more easily browsed and manipulated than a single flat are more easily browsed and manipulated than a single flat
collection. However, hierarchies require categorization decisions collection. However, hierarchies require categorization decisions
that locate resources at a single location in the hierarchy, a that locate resources at a single location in the hierarchy, a
drawback when a resource has multiple valid categories. For example, drawback when a resource has multiple valid categories. For example,
in a hierarchy of vehicle descriptions containing collections for in a hierarchy of vehicle descriptions containing collections for
skipping to change at page 4, line 41 skipping to change at page 4, line 42
access to some resources at other universities. For many reasons, it access to some resources at other universities. For many reasons, it
may be undesirable to make physical copies of the shared resources on may be undesirable to make physical copies of the shared resources on
the local server: to conserve disk space, to respect copyright the local server: to conserve disk space, to respect copyright
constraints, or to make any changes in the shared resources visible constraints, or to make any changes in the shared resources visible
automatically. Being able to create new access paths to existing automatically. Being able to create new access paths to existing
resources in other collections or even on other servers is useful for resources in other collections or even on other servers is useful for
this sort of case. this sort of case.
The BIND method defined here provides a mechanism for allowing The BIND method defined here provides a mechanism for allowing
clients to create alternative access paths to existing WebDAV clients to create alternative access paths to existing WebDAV
resources. HTTP [RFC2616] and WebDAV [RFC2518] methods are able to resources. HTTP [RFC2616] and WebDAV [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis]
work because there are mappings between URIs and resources. A method methods are able to work because there are mappings between URIs and
is addressed to a URI, and the server follows the mapping from that resources. A method is addressed to a URI, and the server follows
URI to a resource, applying the method to that resource. Multiple the mapping from that URI to a resource, applying the method to that
URIs may be mapped to the same resource, but until now there has been resource. Multiple URIs may be mapped to the same resource, but
no way for clients to create additional URIs mapped to existing until now there has been no way for clients to create additional URIs
resources. mapped to existing resources.
BIND lets clients associate a new URI with an existing WebDAV BIND lets clients associate a new URI with an existing WebDAV
resource, and this URI can then be used to submit requests to the resource, and this URI can then be used to submit requests to the
resource. Since URIs of WebDAV resources are hierarchical, and resource. Since URIs of WebDAV resources are hierarchical, and
correspond to a hierarchy of collections in resource space, the BIND correspond to a hierarchy of collections in resource space, the BIND
method also has the effect of adding the resource to a collection. method also has the effect of adding the resource to a collection.
As new URIs are associated with the resource, it appears in As new URIs are associated with the resource, it appears in
additional collections. additional collections.
A BIND request does not create a new resource, but simply makes A BIND request does not create a new resource, but simply makes
skipping to change at page 5, line 26 skipping to change at page 5, line 27
This specification is organized as follows. Section 1.1 defines This specification is organized as follows. Section 1.1 defines
terminology used in the rest of the specification, while Section 2 terminology used in the rest of the specification, while Section 2
overviews bindings. Section 3 defines the new properties needed to overviews bindings. Section 3 defines the new properties needed to
support multiple bindings to the same resource. Section 4 specifies support multiple bindings to the same resource. Section 4 specifies
the BIND method, used to create multiple bindings to the same the BIND method, used to create multiple bindings to the same
resource. Section 5 specifies the UNBIND method, used to remove a resource. Section 5 specifies the UNBIND method, used to remove a
binding to a resource. Section 6 specifies the REBIND method, used binding to a resource. Section 6 specifies the REBIND method, used
to move a binding to another collection. to move a binding to another collection.
1.1 Terminology 1.1. Terminology
The terminology used here follows and extends that in the WebDAV The terminology used here follows and extends that in the WebDAV
Distributed Authoring Protocol specification [RFC2518]. Distributed Authoring Protocol specification
[draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis].
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
This document uses XML DTD fragments ([XML]) as a purely notational This document uses XML DTD fragments ([XML]) as a notational
convention. WebDAV request and response bodies cannot be validated convention, using the rules defined in Section 17 of
due to the specific extensibility rules defined in section 23 of [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis].
[RFC2518] and due to the fact that all XML elements defined by this
specification use the XML namespace name "DAV:". In particular:
o Element names use the "DAV:" namespace.
o Element ordering is irrelevant.
o Extension elements/attributes (elements/attributes not already
defined as valid child elements) may be added anywhere, except
when explicitly stated otherwise.
URI Mapping URI Mapping
A relation between an absolute URI and a resource. For an A relation between an absolute URI and a resource. For an
absolute URI U and the resource it identifies R, the URI mapping absolute URI U and the resource it identifies R, the URI mapping
can be thought of as (U => R). Since a resource can represent can be thought of as (U => R). Since a resource can represent
items that are not network retrievable, as well as those that are, items that are not network retrievable, as well as those that are,
it is possible for a resource to have zero, one, or many URI it is possible for a resource to have zero, one, or many URI
mappings. Mapping a resource to an "http" scheme URI makes it mappings. Mapping a resource to an "http" scheme URI makes it
possible to submit HTTP protocol requests to the resource using possible to submit HTTP protocol requests to the resource using
the URI. the URI.
Path Segment Path Segment
skipping to change at page 6, line 16 skipping to change at page 6, line 8
can be thought of as (U => R). Since a resource can represent can be thought of as (U => R). Since a resource can represent
items that are not network retrievable, as well as those that are, items that are not network retrievable, as well as those that are,
it is possible for a resource to have zero, one, or many URI it is possible for a resource to have zero, one, or many URI
mappings. Mapping a resource to an "http" scheme URI makes it mappings. Mapping a resource to an "http" scheme URI makes it
possible to submit HTTP protocol requests to the resource using possible to submit HTTP protocol requests to the resource using
the URI. the URI.
Path Segment Path Segment
Informally, the characters found between slashes ("/") in a URI. Informally, the characters found between slashes ("/") in a URI.
Formally, as defined in section 3.3 of [RFC3986]. Formally, as defined in Section 3.3 of [RFC3986].
Binding Binding
A relation between a single path segment (in a collection) and a A relation between a single path segment (in a collection) and a
resource. A binding is part of the state of a collection. If two resource. A binding is part of the state of a collection. If two
different collections contain a binding between the same path different collections contain a binding between the same path
segment and the same resource, these are two distinct bindings. segment and the same resource, these are two distinct bindings.
So for a collection C, a path segment S, and a resource R, the So for a collection C, a path segment S, and a resource R, the
binding can be thought of as C:(S -> R). Bindings create URI binding can be thought of as C:(S -> R). Bindings create URI
mappings, and hence allow requests to be sent to a single resource mappings, and hence allow requests to be sent to a single resource
skipping to change at page 6, line 46 skipping to change at page 6, line 38
A resource that contains, as part of its state, a set of bindings A resource that contains, as part of its state, a set of bindings
that identify internal member resources. that identify internal member resources.
Internal Member URI Internal Member URI
The URI that identifies an internal member of a collection, and The URI that identifies an internal member of a collection, and
that consists of the URI for the collection, followed by a slash that consists of the URI for the collection, followed by a slash
character ('/'), followed by the path segment of the binding for character ('/'), followed by the path segment of the binding for
that internal member. that internal member.
1.2 Rationale for Distinguishing Bindings from URI Mappings 1.2. Rationale for Distinguishing Bindings from URI Mappings
In [RFC2518], the state of a collection is defined as containing a In [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis], the definition of collection state
list of internal member URIs. If there are multiple mappings to a has been partly updated so that it doesn't depend on the access URL
collection, then the state of the collection is different when you anymore. However, there are some more changes needed in the
refer to it via a different URI. This is undesirable, since ideally subsequent paragraphs to complete this change. The authors of this
a collection's membership should remain the same, independent of specification recommend updating paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of Section 5.2
which URI was used to reference it. of [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] to read:
The notion of binding is introduced to separate the final segment of A collection MUST contain at most one mapping for a given path
a URI from its parent collection's contribution. This done, a segment, i.e., it is illegal to have the same path segment mapped
collection can be defined as containing a set of bindings, thus to more than one resource. Properties defined on collections
permitting new mappings to a collection without modifying its behave exactly as do properties on non-collection resources.
membership. The authors of this specification anticipate and
recommend that future revisions of [RFC2518] will update the
definition of the state of a collection to correspond to the
definition in this document.
1.3 Method Preconditions and Postconditions For all WebDAV compliant resources A and B, identified by URLs "U"
and "V" respectively, such that "V" is equal to "U/SEGMENT", A
MUST be a collection that contains a mapping from "SEGMENT" to B.
So, if resource B with URL "http://example.com/bar/blah" is WebDAV
compliant and if resource A with URL "http://example.com/bar/" is
WebDAV compliant, then resource A must be a collection and must
contain a mapping from "blah" to B.
A "precondition" of a method describes the state on the server that Collection resources MAY have mappings to non-WebDAV compliant
must be true for that method to be performed. A "postcondition" of a resources in the HTTP URL namespace hierarchy but are not required
method describes the state on the server that must be true after that to do so. For example, if the resource X with URL
method has completed. If a method precondition or postcondition for "http://example.com/bar/blah" is not WebDAV compliant and the
a request is not satisfied, the response status of the request MUST resource A with "URL http://example.com/bar/" identifies a
be either 403 (Forbidden) if the request should not be repeated collection, then A may or may not have a mapping from "blah" to X.
because it will always fail, or 409 (Conflict) if it is expected that
the user might be able to resolve the conflict and resubmit the
request.
In order to allow better client handling of 403 and 409 responses, a (See also
distinct XML element type is associated with each method precondition <http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227#c5>).
and postcondition of a request. When a particular precondition is
not satisfied or a particular postcondition cannot be achieved, the 1.3. Method Preconditions and Postconditions
appropriate XML element MUST be returned as the child of a top-level
DAV:error element in the response body, unless otherwise negotiated See Section 16 of [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] for the definitions
by the request. In a 207 Multi-Status response, the DAV:error of "precondition" and "postcondition".
element would appear in the appropriate DAV:responsedescription
element.
2. Overview of Bindings 2. Overview of Bindings
Bindings are part of the state of a collection. They define the Bindings are part of the state of a collection. They define the
internal members of the collection, and the names of those internal internal members of the collection, and the names of those internal
members. members.
Bindings are added and removed by a variety of existing HTTP methods. Bindings are added and removed by a variety of existing HTTP methods.
A method that creates a new resource, such as PUT, COPY, and MKCOL, A method that creates a new resource, such as PUT, COPY, and MKCOL,
adds a binding. A method that deletes a resource, such as DELETE, adds a binding. A method that deletes a resource, such as DELETE,
skipping to change at page 8, line 20 skipping to change at page 8, line 8
In particular, the removal of one binding to a resource (e.g. with a In particular, the removal of one binding to a resource (e.g. with a
DELETE or a MOVE) MUST NOT disrupt another binding to that resource, DELETE or a MOVE) MUST NOT disrupt another binding to that resource,
e.g. by turning that binding into a dangling path segment. The e.g. by turning that binding into a dangling path segment. The
server MUST NOT reclaim system resources after removing one binding, server MUST NOT reclaim system resources after removing one binding,
while other bindings to the resource remain. In other words, the while other bindings to the resource remain. In other words, the
server MUST maintain the integrity of a binding. It is permissible, server MUST maintain the integrity of a binding. It is permissible,
however, for future method definitions (e.g., a DESTROY method) to however, for future method definitions (e.g., a DESTROY method) to
have semantics that explicitly remove all bindings and/or immediately have semantics that explicitly remove all bindings and/or immediately
reclaim system resources. reclaim system resources.
2.1 Bindings to Collections 2.1. Bindings to Collections
Creating a new binding to a collection makes each resource associated Creating a new binding to a collection makes each resource associated
with a binding in that collection accessible via a new URI, and thus with a binding in that collection accessible via a new URI, and thus
creates new URI mappings to those resources but no new bindings. creates new URI mappings to those resources but no new bindings.
For example, suppose a new binding CollY is created for collection C1 For example, suppose a new binding CollY is created for collection C1
in the figure below. It immediately becomes possible to access in the figure below. It immediately becomes possible to access
resource R1 using the URI /CollY/x.gif and to access resource R2 resource R1 using the URI /CollY/x.gif and to access resource R2
using the URI /CollY/y.jpg, but no new bindings for these child using the URI /CollY/y.jpg, but no new bindings for these child
resources were created. This is because bindings are part of the resources were created. This is because bindings are part of the
skipping to change at page 9, line 25 skipping to change at page 8, line 44
| bindings: | | bindings: |
| x.gif y.jpg | | x.gif y.jpg |
+------------------+ +------------------+
| \ | \
| \ | \
| \ | \
+-------------+ +-------------+ +-------------+ +-------------+
| Resource R1 | | Resource R2 | | Resource R1 | | Resource R2 |
+-------------+ +-------------+ +-------------+ +-------------+
2.1.1 Bind loops 2.1.1. Bind loops
Bindings to collections can result in loops, which servers MUST Bindings to collections can result in loops, which servers MUST
detect when processing "Depth: infinity" requests. It is sometimes detect when processing "Depth: infinity" requests. It is sometimes
possible to complete an operation in spite of the presence of a loop. possible to complete an operation in spite of the presence of a loop.
For instance, a PROPFIND can still succeed if the server uses the new For instance, a PROPFIND can still succeed if the server uses the new
status code 208 (Already Reported) defined in Section 7.1. status code 208 (Already Reported) defined in Section 7.1.
However, the 506 (Loop Detected) status code is defined in However, the 506 (Loop Detected) status code is defined in
Section 7.2 for use in contexts where an operation is terminated Section 7.2 for use in contexts where an operation is terminated
because a loop was encountered. because a loop was encountered.
2.2 URI Mappings Created by a new Binding 2.2. URI Mappings Created by a new Binding
Suppose a binding from "Binding-Name" to resource R is to be added to Suppose a binding from "Binding-Name" to resource R is to be added to
a collection, C. Then if C-MAP is the set of URIs that were mapped to a collection, C. Then if C-MAP is the set of URIs that were mapped to
C before the BIND request, then for each URI "C-URI" in C-MAP, the C before the BIND request, then for each URI "C-URI" in C-MAP, the
URI "C-URI/Binding-Name" is mapped to resource R following the BIND URI "C-URI/Binding-Name" is mapped to resource R following the BIND
request. request.
For example, if a binding from "foo.html" to R is added to a For example, if a binding from "foo.html" to R is added to a
collection C, and if the following URIs are mapped to C: collection C, and if the following URIs are mapped to C:
skipping to change at page 10, line 28 skipping to change at page 9, line 47
http://www.example.com/A/1/myself/myself http://www.example.com/A/1/myself/myself
... ...
and the following infinite number of additional mappings to R are and the following infinite number of additional mappings to R are
introduced: introduced:
http://www.example.com/A/1/myself/foo.html http://www.example.com/A/1/myself/foo.html
http://www.example.com/A/1/myself/myself/foo.html http://www.example.com/A/1/myself/myself/foo.html
... ...
2.3 COPY and Bindings 2.3. COPY and Bindings
As defined in Section 8.8 of [RFC2518], COPY causes the resource As defined in Section 9.8 of [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis], COPY
identified by the Request-URI to be duplicated, and makes the new causes the resource identified by the Request-URI to be duplicated,
resource accessible using the URI specified in the Destination and makes the new resource accessible using the URI specified in the
header. Upon successful completion of a COPY, a new binding is Destination header. Upon successful completion of a COPY, a new
created between the last path segment of the Destination header, and binding is created between the last path segment of the Destination
the destination resource. The new binding is added to its parent header, and the destination resource. The new binding is added to
collection, identified by the Destination header minus its final its parent collection, identified by the Destination header minus its
segment. final segment.
The following figure shows an example: Suppose that a COPY is issued The following figure shows an example: Suppose that a COPY is issued
to URI-3 for resource R (which is also mapped to URI-1 and URI-2), to URI-3 for resource R (which is also mapped to URI-1 and URI-2),
with the Destination header set to URI-X. After successful with the Destination header set to URI-X. After successful
completion of the COPY operation, resource R is duplicated to create completion of the COPY operation, resource R is duplicated to create
resource R', and a new binding has been created which creates at resource R', and a new binding has been created which creates at
least the URI mapping between URI-X and the new resource (although least the URI mapping between URI-X and the new resource (although
other URI mappings may also have been created). other URI mappings may also have been created).
URI-1 URI-2 URI-3 URI-X URI-1 URI-2 URI-3 URI-X
| | | | | | | |
| | | <---- URI Mappings ----> | | | | <---- URI Mappings ----> |
| | | | | | | |
+---------------------+ +------------------------+ +---------------------+ +------------------------+
| Resource R | | Resource R' | | Resource R | | Resource R' |
+---------------------+ +------------------------+ +---------------------+ +------------------------+
It might be thought that a COPY request with "Depth: 0" on a It might be thought that a COPY request with "Depth: 0" on a
collection would duplicate its bindings, since bindings are part of collection would duplicate its bindings, since bindings are part of
the collection's state. This is not the case, however. The the collection's state. This is not the case, however. The
definition of Depth in [RFC2518] makes it clear that a "Depth: 0" definition of Depth in [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] makes it clear
request does not apply to a collection's members. Consequently, a that a "Depth: 0" request does not apply to a collection's members.
COPY with "Depth: 0" does not duplicate the bindings contained by the Consequently, a COPY with "Depth: 0" does not duplicate the bindings
collection. contained by the collection.
If a COPY request causes an existing resource to be updated, the If a COPY request causes an existing resource to be updated, the
bindings to that resource MUST be unaffected by the COPY request. bindings to that resource MUST be unaffected by the COPY request.
Using the preceding example, suppose that a COPY request is issued to Using the preceding example, suppose that a COPY request is issued to
URI-X for resource R', with the Destination header set to URI-2. The URI-X for resource R', with the Destination header set to URI-2. The
content and dead properties of resource R would be updated to be a content and dead properties of resource R would be updated to be a
copy of those of resource R', but the mappings from URI-1, URI-2, and copy of those of resource R', but the mappings from URI-1, URI-2, and
URI-3 to resource R remain unaffected. If because of multiple URI-3 to resource R remain unaffected. If because of multiple
bindings to a resource, more than one source resource updates a bindings to a resource, more than one source resource updates a
single destination resource, the order of the updates is server single destination resource, the order of the updates is server
defined. defined.
If a COPY request would cause a new resource to be created as a copy If a COPY request would cause a new resource to be created as a copy
of an existing resource, and that COPY request has already created a of an existing resource, and that COPY request has already created a
copy of that existing resource, the COPY request instead creates copy of that existing resource, the COPY request instead creates
another binding to the previous copy, instead of creating a new another binding to the previous copy, instead of creating a new
resource. resource.
2.3.1 Example: COPY with 'Depth: infinity' in presence of bind loops 2.3.1. Example: COPY with 'Depth: infinity' in presence of bind loops
As an example of how COPY with Depth infinity would work in the As an example of how COPY with Depth infinity would work in the
presence of bindings, consider the following collection: presence of bindings, consider the following collection:
+------------------+ +------------------+
| Root Collection | | Root Collection |
| bindings: | | bindings: |
| CollX | | CollX |
+------------------+ +------------------+
| |
skipping to change at page 14, line 5 skipping to change at page 13, line 5
+-------------+ | bindings: | | +-------------+ | bindings: | |
| y.gif CollZ | | | y.gif CollZ | |
+-----------------+ | +-----------------+ |
| | | | | |
| +-------+ | +-------+
| |
+-------------+ +-------------+
| Resource R4 | | Resource R4 |
+-------------+ +-------------+
2.3.2 Example: COPY with 'Depth: infinity' with multiple bindings to a 2.3.2. Example: COPY with 'Depth: infinity' with multiple bindings to a
leaf resource leaf resource
Given the following collection hierarchy: Given the following collection hierarchy:
+------------------+ +------------------+
| Root Collection | | Root Collection |
| bindings: | | bindings: |
| CollX | | CollX |
+------------------+ +------------------+
| |
skipping to change at page 15, line 5 skipping to change at page 14, line 5
| Collection C1 | | Collection C2 | | Collection C1 | | Collection C2 |
| bindings: | | bindings: | | bindings: | | bindings: |
| x.gif y.gif | | x.gif y.gif | | x.gif y.gif | | x.gif y.gif |
+----------------+ +-----------------+ +----------------+ +-----------------+
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
+-------------+ +-------------+ +-------------+ +-------------+
| Resource R1 | | Resource R2 | | Resource R1 | | Resource R2 |
+-------------+ +-------------+ +-------------+ +-------------+
2.4 DELETE and Bindings 2.4. DELETE and Bindings
When there are multiple bindings to a resource, a DELETE applied to When there are multiple bindings to a resource, a DELETE applied to
that resource MUST NOT remove any bindings to that resource other that resource MUST NOT remove any bindings to that resource other
than the one identified by the Request-URI. For example, suppose the than the one identified by the Request-URI. For example, suppose the
collection identified by the URI "/a" has a binding named "x" to a collection identified by the URI "/a" has a binding named "x" to a
resource R, and another collection identified by "/b" has a binding resource R, and another collection identified by "/b" has a binding
named "y" to the same resource R. Then a DELETE applied to "/a/x" named "y" to the same resource R. Then a DELETE applied to "/a/x"
removes the binding named "x" from "/a" but MUST NOT remove the removes the binding named "x" from "/a" but MUST NOT remove the
binding named "y" from "/b" (i.e. after the DELETE, "/y/b" continues binding named "y" from "/b" (i.e. after the DELETE, "/y/b" continues
to identify the resource R). In particular, although Section 8.6.1 to identify the resource R).
of [RFC2518] states that during DELETE processing, a server "MUST
remove any URI for the resource identified by the Request-URI from
collections which contain it as a member", a server that supports the
binding protocol MUST NOT follow this requirement.
When DELETE is applied to a collection, it MUST NOT modify the When DELETE is applied to a collection, it MUST NOT modify the
membership of any other collection that is not itself a member of the membership of any other collection that is not itself a member of the
collection being deleted. For example, if both "/a/.../x" and collection being deleted. For example, if both "/a/.../x" and
"/b/.../y" identify the same collection, C, then applying DELETE to "/b/.../y" identify the same collection, C, then applying DELETE to
"/a" must not delete an internal member from C or from any other "/a" must not delete an internal member from C or from any other
collection that is a member of C, because that would modify the collection that is a member of C, because that would modify the
membership of "/b". membership of "/b".
If a collection supports the UNBIND method (see Section 5), a DELETE If a collection supports the UNBIND method (see Section 5), a DELETE
of an internal member of a collection MAY be implemented as an UNBIND of an internal member of a collection MAY be implemented as an UNBIND
request. In this case, applying DELETE to a Request-URI has the request. In this case, applying DELETE to a Request-URI has the
effect of removing the binding identified by the final segment of the effect of removing the binding identified by the final segment of the
Request-URI from the collection identified by the Request-URI minus Request-URI from the collection identified by the Request-URI minus
its final segment. Although [RFC2518] allows a DELETE to be a non- its final segment. Although [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] allows a
atomic operation, when the DELETE operation is implemented as an DELETE to be a non-atomic operation, when the DELETE operation is
UNBIND, the operation is atomic. In particular, a DELETE on a implemented as an UNBIND, the operation is atomic. In particular, a
hierarchy of resources is simply the removal of a binding to the DELETE on a hierarchy of resources is simply the removal of a binding
collection identified by the Request-URI. to the collection identified by the Request-URI.
2.5 MOVE and Bindings 2.5. MOVE and Bindings
When MOVE is applied to a resource, the other bindings to that When MOVE is applied to a resource, the other bindings to that
resource MUST be unaffected, and if the resource being moved is a resource MUST be unaffected, and if the resource being moved is a
collection, the bindings to any members of that collection MUST be collection, the bindings to any members of that collection MUST be
unaffected. Also, if MOVE is used with Overwrite:T to delete an unaffected. Also, if MOVE is used with Overwrite:T to delete an
existing resource, the constraints specified for DELETE apply. existing resource, the constraints specified for DELETE apply.
If the destination collection of a MOVE request supports the REBIND If the destination collection of a MOVE request supports the REBIND
method (see Section 6), a MOVE of a resource into that collection MAY method (see Section 6), a MOVE of a resource into that collection MAY
be implemented as a REBIND request. Although [RFC2518] allows a MOVE be implemented as a REBIND request. Although
to be a non-atomic operation, when the MOVE operation is implemented [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] allows a MOVE to be a non-atomic
as a REBIND, the operation is atomic. In particular, applying a MOVE operation, when the MOVE operation is implemented as a REBIND, the
to a Request-URI and a Destination URI has the effect of removing a operation is atomic. In particular, applying a MOVE to a Request-URI
binding to a resource (at the Request-URI), and creating a new and a Destination URI has the effect of removing a binding to a
binding to that resource (at the Destination URI). Even when the resource (at the Request-URI), and creating a new binding to that
Request-URI identifies a collection, the MOVE operation involves only resource (at the Destination URI). Even when the Request-URI
removing one binding to that collection and adding another. identifies a collection, the MOVE operation involves only removing
one binding to that collection and adding another.
As an example, suppose that a MOVE is issued to URI-3 for resource R As an example, suppose that a MOVE is issued to URI-3 for resource R
below (which is also mapped to URI-1 and URI-2), with the Destination below (which is also mapped to URI-1 and URI-2), with the Destination
header set to URI-X. After successful completion of the MOVE header set to URI-X. After successful completion of the MOVE
operation, a new binding has been created which creates the URI operation, a new binding has been created which creates the URI
mapping between URI-X and resource R. The binding corresponding to mapping between URI-X and resource R. The binding corresponding to
the final segment of URI-3 has been removed, which also causes the the final segment of URI-3 has been removed, which also causes the
URI mapping between URI-3 and R to be removed. If resource R were a URI mapping between URI-3 and R to be removed. If resource R were a
collection, old URI-3 based mappings to members of R would have been collection, old URI-3 based mappings to members of R would have been
removed, and new URI-X based mappings to members of R would have been removed, and new URI-X based mappings to members of R would have been
skipping to change at page 16, line 41 skipping to change at page 15, line 38
>> After Request: >> After Request:
URI-1 URI-2 URI-X URI-1 URI-2 URI-X
| | | | | |
| | | <---- URI Mappings | | | <---- URI Mappings
| | | | | |
+---------------------+ +---------------------+
| Resource R | | Resource R |
+---------------------+ +---------------------+
2.6 PROPFIND and Bindings 2.6. PROPFIND and Bindings
Consistent with [RFC2518], the value of a dead property MUST be
independent of the number of bindings to its host resource or of the
path submitted to PROPFIND. On the other hand, the behaviour for
each live property depends on its individual definition (for example,
see [RFC3744], section 5, paragraph 2).
2.7 UNLOCK and Bindings
Due to the specific language used in section 8.11 of [RFC2518], it Consistent with [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis], the value of a dead
might be thought that an UNLOCK request to a locked resource would property MUST be independent of the number of bindings to its host
unlock just the particular binding expressed by the Request-URI, resource or of the path submitted to PROPFIND. On the other hand,
rather than the resource identified by that URI. This is not the the behaviour for each live property depends on its individual
case, however. Section 6 of [RFC2518] clearly states that locks are definition (for example, see [RFC3744], Section 5, paragraph 2).
on resources, not URIs, so the server MUST allow UNLOCK to be used to
unlock a locked resource through any binding to that resource. The
authors of this specification anticipate and recommend that future
revisions of [RFC2518] maintain this behavior.
2.8 Determining Whether Two Bindings Are to the Same Resource 2.7. Determining Whether Two Bindings Are to the Same Resource
It is useful to have some way of determining whether two bindings are It is useful to have some way of determining whether two bindings are
to the same resource. Two resources might have identical contents to the same resource. Two resources might have identical contents
and properties, but not be the same resource (e.g. an update to one and properties, but not be the same resource (e.g. an update to one
resource does not affect the other resource). resource does not affect the other resource).
The REQUIRED DAV:resource-id property defined in Section 3.1 is a The REQUIRED DAV:resource-id property defined in Section 3.1 is a
resource identifier, which MUST be unique across all resources for resource identifier, which MUST be unique across all resources for
all time. If the values of DAV:resource-id returned by PROPFIND all time. If the values of DAV:resource-id returned by PROPFIND
requests through two bindings are identical character by character, requests through two bindings are identical character by character,
skipping to change at page 17, line 40 skipping to change at page 16, line 21
The DAV:resource-id property is created, and its value assigned, when The DAV:resource-id property is created, and its value assigned, when
the resource is created. The value of DAV:resource-id MUST NOT be the resource is created. The value of DAV:resource-id MUST NOT be
changed. Even after the resource is no longer accessible through any changed. Even after the resource is no longer accessible through any
URI, that value MUST NOT be reassigned to another resource's DAV: URI, that value MUST NOT be reassigned to another resource's DAV:
resource-id property. resource-id property.
Any method that creates a new resource MUST assign a new, unique Any method that creates a new resource MUST assign a new, unique
value to its DAV:resource-id property. For example, a PUT applied to value to its DAV:resource-id property. For example, a PUT applied to
a null resource, COPY (when not overwriting an existing target) and a null resource, COPY (when not overwriting an existing target) and
CHECKIN (see [RFC3253], section 4.4) must assign a new, unique value CHECKIN (see [RFC3253], Section 4.4) must assign a new, unique value
to the DAV:resource-id property of the new resource they create. to the DAV:resource-id property of the new resource they create.
On the other hand, any method that affects an existing resource must On the other hand, any method that affects an existing resource must
not change the value of its DAV:resource-id property. Specifically, not change the value of its DAV:resource-id property. Specifically,
a PUT or a COPY that updates an existing resource must not change the a PUT or a COPY that updates an existing resource must not change the
value of its DAV:resource-id property. A REBIND, since it does not value of its DAV:resource-id property. A REBIND, since it does not
create a new resource, but only changes the location of an existing create a new resource, but only changes the location of an existing
resource, must not change the value of the DAV:resource-id property. resource, must not change the value of the DAV:resource-id property.
2.9 Discovering the Bindings to a Resource 2.8. Discovering the Bindings to a Resource
An OPTIONAL DAV:parent-set property on a resource provides a list of An OPTIONAL DAV:parent-set property on a resource provides a list of
the bindings that associate a collection and a URI segment with that the bindings that associate a collection and a URI segment with that
resource. If the DAV:parent-set property exists on a given resource, resource. If the DAV:parent-set property exists on a given resource,
it MUST contain a complete list of all bindings to that resource that it MUST contain a complete list of all bindings to that resource that
the client is authorized to see. When deciding whether to support the client is authorized to see. When deciding whether to support
the DAV:parent-set property, server implementers / administrators the DAV:parent-set property, server implementers / administrators
should balance the benefits it provides against the cost of should balance the benefits it provides against the cost of
maintaining the property and the security risks enumerated in maintaining the property and the security risks enumerated in
Sections 10.4 and 10.5. Sections 10.4 and 10.5.
skipping to change at page 18, line 23 skipping to change at page 17, line 5
3. Properties 3. Properties
The bind feature introduces the properties defined below. The bind feature introduces the properties defined below.
A DAV:allprop PROPFIND request SHOULD NOT return any of the A DAV:allprop PROPFIND request SHOULD NOT return any of the
properties defined by this document. This allows a binding server to properties defined by this document. This allows a binding server to
perform efficiently when a naive client, which does not understand perform efficiently when a naive client, which does not understand
the cost of asking a server to compute all possible live properties, the cost of asking a server to compute all possible live properties,
issues a DAV:allprop PROPFIND request. issues a DAV:allprop PROPFIND request.
3.1 DAV:resource-id Property 3.1. DAV:resource-id Property
The DAV:resource-id property is a REQUIRED property that enables The DAV:resource-id property is a REQUIRED property that enables
clients to determine whether two bindings are to the same resource. clients to determine whether two bindings are to the same resource.
The value of DAV:resource-id is a URI, and may use any registered URI The value of DAV:resource-id is a URI, and may use any registered URI
scheme that guarantees the uniqueness of the value across all scheme that guarantees the uniqueness of the value across all
resources for all time (e.g. the urn:uuid: URN namespace defined in resources for all time (e.g. the urn:uuid: URN namespace defined in
[RFC4122] or the opaquelocktoken: URI scheme defined in [RFC2518]). [RFC4122] or the opaquelocktoken: URI scheme defined in
[draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis]).
<!ELEMENT resource-id (href)> <!ELEMENT resource-id (href)>
3.2 DAV:parent-set Property 3.2. DAV:parent-set Property
The DAV:parent-set property is an OPTIONAL property that enables The DAV:parent-set property is an OPTIONAL property that enables
clients to discover what collections contain a binding to this clients to discover what collections contain a binding to this
resource (i.e. what collections have that resource as an internal resource (i.e. what collections have that resource as an internal
member). It contains an of href/segment pair for each collection member). It contains an of href/segment pair for each collection
that has a binding to the resource. The href identifies the that has a binding to the resource. The href identifies the
collection, and the segment identifies the binding name of that collection, and the segment identifies the binding name of that
resource in that collection. resource in that collection.
A given collection MUST appear only once in the DAV:parent-set for A given collection MUST appear only once in the DAV:parent-set for
any given binding, even if there are multiple URI mappings to that any given binding, even if there are multiple URI mappings to that
collection. collection.
<!ELEMENT parent-set (parent)*> <!ELEMENT parent-set (parent)*>
<!ELEMENT parent (href, segment)> <!ELEMENT parent (href, segment)>
<!ELEMENT segment (#PCDATA)> <!ELEMENT segment (#PCDATA)>
<!-- PCDATA value: segment, as defined in section 3.3 of <!-- PCDATA value: segment, as defined in Section 3.3 of
[RFC3986] --> [RFC3986] -->
3.2.1 Example for DAV:parent-set property 3.2.1. Example for DAV:parent-set property
For example, if collection C1 is mapped to both /CollX and /CollY, For example, if collection C1 is mapped to both /CollX and /CollY,
and C1 contains a binding named "x.gif" to a resource R1, then either and C1 contains a binding named "x.gif" to a resource R1, then either
[/CollX, x.gif] or [/CollY, x.gif] can appear in the DAV:parent-set [/CollX, x.gif] or [/CollY, x.gif] can appear in the DAV:parent-set
of R1, but not both. But if C1 also had a binding named "y.gif" to of R1, but not both. But if C1 also had a binding named "y.gif" to
R1, then there would be two entries for C1 in the DAV:binding-set of R1, then there would be two entries for C1 in the DAV:binding-set of
R1 (i.e. both [/CollX, x.gif] and [/CollX, y.gif] or, alternatively, R1 (i.e. both [/CollX, x.gif] and [/CollX, y.gif] or, alternatively,
both [/CollY, x.gif] and [/CollY, y.gif]). both [/CollY, x.gif] and [/CollY, y.gif]).
+-------------------------+ +-------------------------+
skipping to change at page 20, line 41 skipping to change at page 19, line 16
destroy the resource while A's binding exists. Otherwise server B destroy the resource while A's binding exists. Otherwise server B
may receive a DELETE request that it thinks removes the last binding may receive a DELETE request that it thinks removes the last binding
to the resource and destroy the resource while A's binding still to the resource and destroy the resource while A's binding still
exists. The precondition DAV:cross-server-binding is defined below exists. The precondition DAV:cross-server-binding is defined below
for cases where servers fail cross-server BIND requests because they for cases where servers fail cross-server BIND requests because they
cannot guarantee the integrity of cross-server bindings. cannot guarantee the integrity of cross-server bindings.
By default, if there already is a binding for the specified segment By default, if there already is a binding for the specified segment
in the collection, the new binding replaces the existing binding. in the collection, the new binding replaces the existing binding.
This default binding replacement behavior can be overridden using the This default binding replacement behavior can be overridden using the
Overwrite header defined in Section 9.6 of [RFC2518]. Overwrite header defined in Section 9.6 of
[draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis].
If a BIND request fails, the server state preceding the request MUST If a BIND request fails, the server state preceding the request MUST
be restored. This method is unsafe and idempotent (see [RFC2616], be restored. This method is unsafe and idempotent (see [RFC2616],
section 9.1). Section 9.1).
Marshalling: Marshalling:
The request MAY include an Overwrite header. The request MAY include an Overwrite header.
The request body MUST be a DAV:bind XML element. The request body MUST be a DAV:bind XML element.
<!ELEMENT bind (segment, href)> <!ELEMENT bind (segment, href)>
If the request succeeds, the server MUST return 201 (Created) when If the request succeeds, the server MUST return 201 (Created) when
skipping to change at page 22, line 17 skipping to change at page 21, line 5
protected by a write-lock, then the appropriate token MUST be protected by a write-lock, then the appropriate token MUST be
specified in an If request header. specified in an If request header.
Postconditions: Postconditions:
(DAV:new-binding): The collection MUST have a binding that maps (DAV:new-binding): The collection MUST have a binding that maps
the segment specified in the DAV:segment element in the request the segment specified in the DAV:segment element in the request
body, to the resource identified by the DAV:href element in the body, to the resource identified by the DAV:href element in the
request body. request body.
4.1 Example: BIND 4.1. Example: BIND
>> Request: >> Request:
BIND /CollY HTTP/1.1 BIND /CollY HTTP/1.1
Host: www.example.com Host: www.example.com
Content-Type: text/xml; charset="utf-8" Content-Type: text/xml; charset="utf-8"
Content-Length: xxx Content-Length: xxx
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<D:bind xmlns:D="DAV:"> <D:bind xmlns:D="DAV:">
skipping to change at page 23, line 9 skipping to change at page 21, line 45
the UNBIND body. the UNBIND body.
Once a resource is unreachable by any URI mapping, the server MAY Once a resource is unreachable by any URI mapping, the server MAY
reclaim system resources associated with that resource. If UNBIND reclaim system resources associated with that resource. If UNBIND
removes a binding to a resource, but there remain URI mappings to removes a binding to a resource, but there remain URI mappings to
that resource, the server MUST NOT reclaim system resources that resource, the server MUST NOT reclaim system resources
associated with the resource. associated with the resource.
If an UNBIND request fails, the server state preceding the request If an UNBIND request fails, the server state preceding the request
MUST be restored. This method is unsafe and idempotent (see MUST be restored. This method is unsafe and idempotent (see
[RFC2616], section 9.1). [RFC2616], Section 9.1).
Marshalling: Marshalling:
The request body MUST be a DAV:unbind XML element. The request body MUST be a DAV:unbind XML element.
<!ELEMENT unbind (segment)> <!ELEMENT unbind (segment)>
If the request succeeds, the server MUST return 200 (OK) when the If the request succeeds, the server MUST return 200 (OK) when the
binding was successfully deleted. binding was successfully deleted.
If a response body for a successful request is included, it MUST If a response body for a successful request is included, it MUST
be a DAV:unbind-response XML element. Note that this document be a DAV:unbind-response XML element. Note that this document
does not define any elements for the UNBIND response body, but the does not define any elements for the UNBIND response body, but the
DAV:unbind-response element is defined to ensure interoperability DAV:unbind-response element is defined to ensure interoperability
between future extensions that do define elements for the UNBIND between future extensions that do define elements for the UNBIND
response body. response body.
skipping to change at page 24, line 10 skipping to change at page 23, line 5
(DAV:binding-deleted): The collection MUST NOT have a binding for (DAV:binding-deleted): The collection MUST NOT have a binding for
the segment specified in the DAV:segment element in the request the segment specified in the DAV:segment element in the request
body. body.
(DAV:lock-deleted): If the internal member URI of the binding (DAV:lock-deleted): If the internal member URI of the binding
specified by the Request-URI and the DAV:segment element in the specified by the Request-URI and the DAV:segment element in the
request body was protected by a write-lock at the time of the request body was protected by a write-lock at the time of the
request, that write-lock must have been deleted by the request. request, that write-lock must have been deleted by the request.
5.1 Example: UNBIND 5.1. Example: UNBIND
>> Request: >> Request:
UNBIND /CollX HTTP/1.1 UNBIND /CollX HTTP/1.1
Host: www.example.com Host: www.example.com
Content-Type: text/xml; charset="utf-8" Content-Type: text/xml; charset="utf-8"
Content-Length: xxx Content-Length: xxx
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<D:unbind xmlns:D="DAV:"> <D:unbind xmlns:D="DAV:">
skipping to change at page 24, line 44 skipping to change at page 23, line 39
The REBIND method removes a binding to a resource from a collection, The REBIND method removes a binding to a resource from a collection,
and adds a binding to that resource into the collection identified by and adds a binding to that resource into the collection identified by
the Request-URI. The request body specifies the binding to be added the Request-URI. The request body specifies the binding to be added
(segment) and the old binding to be removed (href). It is (segment) and the old binding to be removed (href). It is
effectively an atomic form of a MOVE request, and MUST be treated the effectively an atomic form of a MOVE request, and MUST be treated the
same way as MOVE for the purpose of determining access permissions. same way as MOVE for the purpose of determining access permissions.
If a REBIND request fails, the server state preceding the request If a REBIND request fails, the server state preceding the request
MUST be restored. This method is unsafe and idempotent (see MUST be restored. This method is unsafe and idempotent (see
[RFC2616], section 9.1). [RFC2616], Section 9.1).
Marshalling: Marshalling:
The request MAY include an Overwrite header. The request MAY include an Overwrite header.
The request body MUST be a DAV:rebind XML element. The request body MUST be a DAV:rebind XML element.
<!ELEMENT rebind (segment, href)> <!ELEMENT rebind (segment, href)>
If the request succeeds, the server MUST return 201 (Created) when If the request succeeds, the server MUST return 201 (Created) when
skipping to change at page 26, line 30 skipping to change at page 25, line 24
in the request body. in the request body.
(DAV:binding-deleted): The URL specified in the DAV:href element (DAV:binding-deleted): The URL specified in the DAV:href element
in the request body MUST NOT be mapped to a resource. in the request body MUST NOT be mapped to a resource.
(DAV:lock-deleted): If the URL specified in the DAV:href element (DAV:lock-deleted): If the URL specified in the DAV:href element
in the request body was protected by a write-lock at the time of in the request body was protected by a write-lock at the time of
the request, that write-lock must have been deleted by the the request, that write-lock must have been deleted by the
request. request.
6.1 Example: REBIND 6.1. Example: REBIND
>> Request: >> Request:
REBIND /CollX HTTP/1.1 REBIND /CollX HTTP/1.1
Host: www.example.com Host: www.example.com
Content-Type: text/xml; charset="utf-8" Content-Type: text/xml; charset="utf-8"
Content-Length: xxx Content-Length: xxx
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<D:rebind xmlns:D="DAV:"> <D:rebind xmlns:D="DAV:">
skipping to change at page 27, line 13 skipping to change at page 26, line 5
"http://www.example.com/CollX", associating "foo.html" with the "http://www.example.com/CollX", associating "foo.html" with the
resource identified by the URI resource identified by the URI
"http://www.example.com/CollY/bar.html", and removes the binding "http://www.example.com/CollY/bar.html", and removes the binding
named "bar.html" from the collection identified by the URI named "bar.html" from the collection identified by the URI
"http://www.example.com/CollY". Clients can now use the URI "http://www.example.com/CollY". Clients can now use the URI
"http://www.example.com/CollX/foo.html" to submit requests to that "http://www.example.com/CollX/foo.html" to submit requests to that
resource, and requests on the URI resource, and requests on the URI
"http://www.example.com/CollY/bar.html" will fail with a 404 (Not "http://www.example.com/CollY/bar.html" will fail with a 404 (Not
Found) response. Found) response.
6.2 Example: REBIND in presence of locks and bind loops 6.2. Example: REBIND in presence of locks and bind loops
To illustrate the effects of locks and bind loops on a REBIND To illustrate the effects of locks and bind loops on a REBIND
operation, consider the following collection: operation, consider the following collection:
+------------------+ +------------------+
| Root Collection | | Root Collection |
| bindings: | | bindings: |
| CollW | | CollW |
+------------------+ +------------------+
| |
skipping to change at page 29, line 41 skipping to change at page 28, line 41
+---------------+ | +---------------+ |
(creates loop) | (creates loop) |
+---------------------------+ +---------------------------+
| Resource R2 | | Resource R2 |
| (inherited lock from C1) | | (inherited lock from C1) |
| (lock token L1) | | (lock token L1) |
+---------------------------+ +---------------------------+
7. Additional Status Codes 7. Additional Status Codes
7.1 208 Already Reported 7.1. 208 Already Reported
The 208 (Already Reported) status code can be used inside a DAV: The 208 (Already Reported) status code can be used inside a DAV:
propstat response element to avoid enumerating the internal members propstat response element to avoid enumerating the internal members
of multiple bindings to the same collection repeatedly. For each of multiple bindings to the same collection repeatedly. For each
binding to a collection inside the request's scope, only one will be binding to a collection inside the request's scope, only one will be
reported with a 200 status, while subsequent DAV:response elements reported with a 200 status, while subsequent DAV:response elements
for all other bindings will use the 208 status, and no DAV:response for all other bindings will use the 208 status, and no DAV:response
elements for their descendants are included. elements for their descendants are included.
Note that the 208 status will only occur for "Depth: infinity" Note that the 208 status will only occur for "Depth: infinity"
skipping to change at page 30, line 24 skipping to change at page 29, line 24
For backward compatibility with clients not aware of the 208 status For backward compatibility with clients not aware of the 208 status
code appearing in multistatus response bodies, it SHOULD NOT be used code appearing in multistatus response bodies, it SHOULD NOT be used
unless the client has signalled support for this specification using unless the client has signalled support for this specification using
the "DAV" request header (see Section 8.2). Instead, a 506 status the "DAV" request header (see Section 8.2). Instead, a 506 status
should be returned when a binding loop is discovered. This allows should be returned when a binding loop is discovered. This allows
the server to return the 506 as the top level return status, if it the server to return the 506 as the top level return status, if it
discovers it before it started the response, or in the middle of a discovers it before it started the response, or in the middle of a
multistatus, if it discovers it in the middle of streaming out a multistatus, if it discovers it in the middle of streaming out a
multistatus response. multistatus response.
7.1.1 Example: PROPFIND by bind-aware client 7.1.1. Example: PROPFIND by bind-aware client
For example, consider a PROPFIND request on /Coll (bound to For example, consider a PROPFIND request on /Coll (bound to
collection C), where the members of /Coll are /Coll/Foo (bound to collection C), where the members of /Coll are /Coll/Foo (bound to
resource R) and /Coll/Bar (bound to collection C). resource R) and /Coll/Bar (bound to collection C).
>> Request: >> Request:
PROPFIND /Coll/ HTTP/1.1 PROPFIND /Coll/ HTTP/1.1
Host: www.example.com Host: www.example.com
Depth: infinity Depth: infinity
skipping to change at page 32, line 5 skipping to change at page 31, line 5
<D:resource-id> <D:resource-id>
<D:href <D:href
>urn:uuid:f81d4fae-7dec-11d0-a765-00a0c91e6bf8</D:href> >urn:uuid:f81d4fae-7dec-11d0-a765-00a0c91e6bf8</D:href>
</D:resource-id> </D:resource-id>
</D:prop> </D:prop>
<D:status>HTTP/1.1 208 Already Reported</D:status> <D:status>HTTP/1.1 208 Already Reported</D:status>
</D:propstat> </D:propstat>
</D:response> </D:response>
</D:multistatus> </D:multistatus>
7.1.2 Example: PROPFIND by non-bind-aware client 7.1.2. Example: PROPFIND by non-bind-aware client
In this example, the client isn't aware of the 208 status code In this example, the client isn't aware of the 208 status code
introduced by this specification. As the "Depth: infinity" PROPFIND introduced by this specification. As the "Depth: infinity" PROPFIND
request would cause a loop condition, the whole request is rejected request would cause a loop condition, the whole request is rejected
with a 506 status. with a 506 status.
>> Request: >> Request:
PROPFIND /Coll/ HTTP/1.1 PROPFIND /Coll/ HTTP/1.1
Host: www.example.com Host: www.example.com
skipping to change at page 32, line 29 skipping to change at page 31, line 29
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<D:propfind xmlns:D="DAV:"> <D:propfind xmlns:D="DAV:">
<D:prop> <D:displayname/> </D:prop> <D:prop> <D:displayname/> </D:prop>
</D:propfind> </D:propfind>
>> Response: >> Response:
HTTP/1.1 506 Loop Detected HTTP/1.1 506 Loop Detected
7.2 506 Loop Detected 7.2. 506 Loop Detected
The 506 (Loop Detected) status code indicates that the server The 506 (Loop Detected) status code indicates that the server
terminated an operation because it encountered an infinite loop while terminated an operation because it encountered an infinite loop while
processing a request with "Depth: infinity". This status indicates processing a request with "Depth: infinity". This status indicates
that the entire operation failed. that the entire operation failed.
8. Capability discovery 8. Capability discovery
8.1 OPTIONS method 8.1. OPTIONS method
If the server supports bindings, it MUST return the compliance class If the server supports bindings, it MUST return the compliance class
name "bind" as a field in the "DAV" response header (see [RFC2518], name "bind" as a field in the "DAV" response header (see
section 9.1) from an OPTIONS request on any resource implemented by [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis], Section 10.1) from an OPTIONS request
that server. A value of "bind" in the "DAV" header MUST indicate on any resource implemented by that server. A value of "bind" in the
that the server supports all MUST level requirements and REQUIRED "DAV" header MUST indicate that the server supports all MUST level
features specified in this document. requirements and REQUIRED features specified in this document.
8.2 'DAV' request header
8.2.1 Generic syntax
This specification introduces the 'DAV' request header that allows
clients to signal compliance to specific WebDAV features. It has the
same syntax as the response header defined in [RFC2518], section 9.1,
but MAY be used with any method.
Note that clients MUST NOT submit a specific compliance class name in
the request header unless the specification defining this compliance
class specifically defines its semantics for clients.
Note that if a server chooses to vary the result of a request based
on values in the "DAV" header, the response either MUST NOT be
cacheable or the server MUST mark the response accordingly using the
"Vary" header (see [RFC2616], section 14.44).
8.2.2 Client compliance class 'bind' 8.2. 'DAV' request header
Clients SHOULD signal support for all MUST level requirements and Clients SHOULD signal support for all MUST level requirements and
REQUIRED features by submitting a "DAV" request header containing the REQUIRED features by submitting a "DAV" request header containing the
compliance class name "bind". In particular, the client MUST compliance class name "bind". In particular, the client MUST
understand the 208 status code defined in Section 7.1. understand the 208 status code defined in Section 7.1.
9. Relationship to WebDAV Access Control Protocol 9. Relationship to WebDAV Access Control Protocol
BIND and REBIND behave the same as MOVE with respect to the DAV:acl BIND and REBIND behave the same as MOVE with respect to the DAV:acl
property (see [RFC3744], section 7.3). property (see [RFC3744], Section 7.3).
10. Security Considerations 10. Security Considerations
This section is provided to make WebDAV implementors aware of the This section is provided to make WebDAV implementors aware of the
security implications of this protocol. security implications of this protocol.
All of the security considerations of HTTP/1.1 and the WebDAV All of the security considerations of HTTP/1.1 and the WebDAV
Distributed Authoring Protocol specification also apply to this Distributed Authoring Protocol specification also apply to this
protocol specification. In addition, bindings introduce several new protocol specification. In addition, bindings introduce several new
security concerns and increase the risk of some existing threats. security concerns and increase the risk of some existing threats.
These issues are detailed below. These issues are detailed below.
10.1 Privacy Concerns 10.1. Privacy Concerns
In a context where cross-server bindings are supported, creating In a context where cross-server bindings are supported, creating
bindings on a trusted server may make it possible for a hostile agent bindings on a trusted server may make it possible for a hostile agent
to induce users to send private information to a target on a to induce users to send private information to a target on a
different server. different server.
10.2 Bind Loops 10.2. Bind Loops
Although bind loops were already possible in HTTP 1.1, the Although bind loops were already possible in HTTP 1.1, the
introduction of the BIND method creates a new avenue for clients to introduction of the BIND method creates a new avenue for clients to
create loops accidentally or maliciously. If the binding and its create loops accidentally or maliciously. If the binding and its
target are on the same server, the server may be able to detect BIND target are on the same server, the server may be able to detect BIND
requests that would create loops. Servers are required to detect requests that would create loops. Servers are required to detect
loops that are caused by bindings to collections during the loops that are caused by bindings to collections during the
processing of any requests with "Depth: infinity". processing of any requests with "Depth: infinity".
10.3 Bindings, and Denial of Service 10.3. Bindings, and Denial of Service
Denial of service attacks were already possible by posting URIs that Denial of service attacks were already possible by posting URIs that
were intended for limited use at heavily used Web sites. The were intended for limited use at heavily used Web sites. The
introduction of BIND creates a new avenue for similar denial of introduction of BIND creates a new avenue for similar denial of
service attacks. If cross-server bindings are supported, clients can service attacks. If cross-server bindings are supported, clients can
now create bindings at heavily used sites to target locations that now create bindings at heavily used sites to target locations that
were not designed for heavy usage. were not designed for heavy usage.
10.4 Private Locations May Be Revealed 10.4. Private Locations May Be Revealed
If the DAV:parent-set property is maintained on a resource, the If the DAV:parent-set property is maintained on a resource, the
owners of the bindings risk revealing private locations. The owners of the bindings risk revealing private locations. The
directory structures where bindings are located are available to directory structures where bindings are located are available to
anyone who has access to the DAV:parent-set property on the resource. anyone who has access to the DAV:parent-set property on the resource.
Moving a binding may reveal its new location to anyone with access to Moving a binding may reveal its new location to anyone with access to
DAV:parent-set on its resource. DAV:parent-set on its resource.
10.5 DAV:parent-set and Denial of Service 10.5. DAV:parent-set and Denial of Service
If the server maintains the DAV:parent-set property in response to If the server maintains the DAV:parent-set property in response to
bindings created in other administrative domains, it is exposed to bindings created in other administrative domains, it is exposed to
hostile attempts to make it devote resources to adding bindings to hostile attempts to make it devote resources to adding bindings to
the list. the list.
11. Internationalization Considerations 11. Internationalization Considerations
All internationalization considerations mentioned in [RFC2518] also All internationalization considerations mentioned in
apply to this document. [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] also apply to this document.
12. IANA Considerations 12. IANA Considerations
All IANA considerations mentioned in [RFC2518] also apply to this All IANA considerations mentioned in [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis]
document. also apply to this document.
13. Acknowledgements 13. Acknowledgements
This document is the collaborative product of the authors and Tyson This document is the collaborative product of the authors and Tyson
Chihaya, Jim Davis, Chuck Fay and Judith Slein. This draft has Chihaya, Jim Davis, Chuck Fay and Judith Slein. This draft has
benefited from thoughtful discussion by Jim Amsden, Peter Carlson, benefited from thoughtful discussion by Jim Amsden, Peter Carlson,
Steve Carter, Ken Coar, Ellis Cohen, Dan Connolly, Bruce Cragun, Steve Carter, Ken Coar, Ellis Cohen, Dan Connolly, Bruce Cragun,
Spencer Dawkins, Mark Day, Rajiv Dulepet, David Durand, Lisa Spencer Dawkins, Mark Day, Rajiv Dulepet, David Durand, Lisa
Dusseault, Stefan Eissing, Roy Fielding, Yaron Goland, Joe Dusseault, Stefan Eissing, Roy Fielding, Yaron Goland, Joe
Hildebrand, Fred Hitt, Alex Hopmann, James Hunt, Marcus Jager, Chris Hildebrand, Fred Hitt, Alex Hopmann, James Hunt, Marcus Jager, Chris
Kaler, Manoj Kasichainula, Rohit Khare, Brian Korver, Daniel Kaler, Manoj Kasichainula, Rohit Khare, Brian Korver, Daniel
LaLiberte, Steve Martin, Larry Masinter, Jeff McAffer, Surendra LaLiberte, Steve Martin, Larry Masinter, Jeff McAffer, Surendra
Koduru Reddy, Max Rible, Sam Ruby, Bradley Sergeant, Nick Shelness, Koduru Reddy, Max Rible, Sam Ruby, Bradley Sergeant, Nick Shelness,
John Stracke, John Tigue, John Turner, Kevin Wiggen, and other John Stracke, John Tigue, John Turner, Kevin Wiggen, and other
members of the WebDAV working group. members of the WebDAV working group.
14. References 14. References
14.1 Normative References 14.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2518] Goland, Y., Whitehead, E., Faizi, A., Carter, S., and D.
Jensen, "HTTP Extensions for Distributed Authoring --
WEBDAV", RFC 2518, February 1999.
[RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., [RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H.,
Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext
Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999. Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.
[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform [RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
RFC 3986, January 2005. RFC 3986, January 2005.
[XML] Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C., Maler, E., and [XML] Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C., Maler, E., and
F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Third F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Third
Edition)", W3C REC-xml-20040204, February 2004, Edition)", W3C REC-xml-20040204, February 2004,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-20040204>. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-20040204>.
14.2 Informative References [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis]
Dusseault, L., Ed., "HTTP Extensions for Distributed
Authoring - WebDAV RFC2518 bis",
draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-12 (work in progress),
February 2006, <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/
draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-12.html>.
14.2. Informative References
[RFC3253] Clemm, G., Amsden, J., Ellison, T., Kaler, C., and J. [RFC3253] Clemm, G., Amsden, J., Ellison, T., Kaler, C., and J.
Whitehead, "Versioning Extensions to WebDAV (Web Whitehead, "Versioning Extensions to WebDAV (Web
Distributed Authoring and Versioning)", RFC 3253, Distributed Authoring and Versioning)", RFC 3253,
March 2002. March 2002.
[RFC3744] Clemm, G., Reschke, J., Sedlar, E., and J. Whitehead, "Web [RFC3744] Clemm, G., Reschke, J., Sedlar, E., and J. Whitehead, "Web
Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV) Access Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV) Access
Control Protocol", RFC 3744, May 2004. Control Protocol", RFC 3744, May 2004.
[RFC4122] Leach, P., Mealling, M., and R. Salz, "A Universally [RFC4122] Leach, P., Mealling, M., and R. Salz, "A Universally
Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122, Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122,
July 2005. July 2005.
Authors' Addresses
Geoffrey Clemm
IBM
20 Maguire Road
Lexington, MA 02421
Email: geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com
Jason Crawford
IBM Research
P.O. Box 704
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
Email: ccjason@us.ibm.com
Julian F. Reschke
greenbytes GmbH
Salzmannstrasse 152
Muenster, NW 48159
Germany
Email: julian.reschke@greenbytes.de
Jim Whitehead
UC Santa Cruz, Dept. of Computer Science
1156 High Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95064
Email: ejw@cse.ucsc.edu
Appendix A. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication) Appendix A. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)
A.1 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-02 A.1. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-02
Add and resolve issues "2.3_COPY_SHARED_BINDINGS" and Add and resolve issues "2.3_COPY_SHARED_BINDINGS" and
"2.3_MULTIPLE_COPY". Add issue "5.1_LOOP_STATUS" and proposed "2.3_MULTIPLE_COPY". Add issue "5.1_LOOP_STATUS" and proposed
resolution, but keep it open. Add issues "ED_references" and resolution, but keep it open. Add issues "ED_references" and
"4_507_status". Started work on index. Rename document to "Binding "4_507_status". Started work on index. Rename document to "Binding
Extensions to Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV)". Extensions to Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV)".
Rename "References" to "Normative References". Close issue Rename "References" to "Normative References". Close issue
"ED_references". Close issue "4_507_status". "ED_references". Close issue "4_507_status".
A.2 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-03 A.2. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-03
Add and close issues "9.2_redirect_loops", "ED_authors" and Add and close issues "9.2_redirect_loops", "ED_authors" and
"ED_updates". Add section about capability discovery (DAV header). "ED_updates". Add section about capability discovery (DAV header).
Close issues "5.1_LOOP_STATUS". Add and resolve new issue Close issues "5.1_LOOP_STATUS". Add and resolve new issue
"5.1_506_STATUS_STREAMING". Update XML spec reference. Add issue "5.1_506_STATUS_STREAMING". Update XML spec reference. Add issue
"locking" and resolve as invalid. "locking" and resolve as invalid.
A.3 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-04 A.3. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-04
Add and close issues "6_precondition_binding_allowed" and Add and close issues "6_precondition_binding_allowed" and
"6_lock_behaviour". Add mailing list and issues list pointers to "6_lock_behaviour". Add mailing list and issues list pointers to
front. front.
A.4 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-05 A.4. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-05
Editorial fixes. Add and resolve issues "1.3_error_negotiation", Editorial fixes. Add and resolve issues "1.3_error_negotiation",
"2.5_language" and "7.1.1_add_resource_id". Add historical issue "2.5_language" and "7.1.1_add_resource_id". Add historical issue
"4_LOCK_BEHAVIOR" and it's resolution for better tracking. "4_LOCK_BEHAVIOR" and it's resolution for better tracking.
A.5 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-06 A.5. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-06
Rewrite Editorial Note. Open and resolve issues "2.6_identical", Rewrite Editorial Note. Open and resolve issues "2.6_identical",
"specify_safeness_and_idempotence" and "ED_rfc2026_ref". "specify_safeness_and_idempotence" and "ED_rfc2026_ref".
A.6 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-07 A.6. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-07
Add more index items (no change tracking). Add and resolve issues Add more index items (no change tracking). Add and resolve issues
"2.3_copy_to_same", "bind_properties", "bind_vs_ACL", "2.3_copy_to_same", "bind_properties", "bind_vs_ACL",
"6_rebind_intro" and "rfc2396bis" (actually an action item). Fix XML "6_rebind_intro" and "rfc2396bis" (actually an action item). Fix XML
DTD fragment in section 3.3. Make spelling of "Request-URI" DTD fragment in section 3.3. Make spelling of "Request-URI"
consistent. consistent.
A.7 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-08 A.7. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-08
Resolved editorial issues raised by Jim Whitehead in <http:// Resolved editorial issues raised by Jim Whitehead in <http://
lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2004OctDec/0129.html>. lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2004OctDec/0129.html>.
Add and resolve issues "atomicity", "2_allow_destroy", Add and resolve issues "atomicity", "2_allow_destroy",
"2.1_separate_loop_discussion", "2.1.1_bind_loops_vs_locks", "2.1_separate_loop_discussion", "2.1.1_bind_loops_vs_locks",
"2.3_copy_depth_infinity", "2.3_copy_example", "2.3_copy_vs_loops", "2.3_copy_depth_infinity", "2.3_copy_example", "2.3_copy_vs_loops",
"2.6_resource-id_vs_versions", "3.2_example" and "2.6_resource-id_vs_versions", "3.2_example" and
"6_rebind_premissions". Add issue "2.6_when_do_ids_change". Re-open "6_rebind_premissions". Add issue "2.6_when_do_ids_change". Re-open
and resolve "6_rebind_intro". and resolve "6_rebind_intro".
A.8 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-09 A.8. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-09
Add and resolve issue "6.1_rebind_vs_locks", adding proposed example Add and resolve issue "6.1_rebind_vs_locks", adding proposed example
text. Add action item "3.1_uuids". Close issue text. Add action item "3.1_uuids". Close issue
"2.6_when_do_ids_change". Add and resolve issues "2.6_when_do_ids_change". Add and resolve issues
"2.6_bindings_vs_properties" and "uri_draft_ref". "2.6_bindings_vs_properties" and "uri_draft_ref".
A.9 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-10 A.9. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-10
Resolve action item "3.1_uuids". Add and resolve issue Resolve action item "3.1_uuids". Add and resolve issue
"2.7_unlock_vs_bindings". Revisit issue "2.7_unlock_vs_bindings". Revisit issue
"2.6_bindings_vs_properties", and remove the part of the sentence "2.6_bindings_vs_properties", and remove the part of the sentence
that speaks about live properties. Update "rfc2396bis" references to that speaks about live properties. Update "rfc2396bis" references to
"RFC3986". Add issue "9_ns_op_and_acl" and add potential resolution. "RFC3986". Add issue "9_ns_op_and_acl" and add potential resolution.
Align artwork where applicable (new xml2rfc1.29rc2 feature). Align artwork where applicable (new xml2rfc1.29rc2 feature).
A.10 Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-11 A.10. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-11
Updated [draft-mealling-uuid-urn] to [RFC4122]. Add statement about Updated [draft-mealling-uuid-urn] to [RFC4122]. Add statement about
live properties in Section 2.6. live properties in Section 2.6.
Appendix B. Open issues (to be removed by RFC Editor prior to A.11. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-12
Updated Author's address. Uppercase "Section" when referring to
other documents.
Updating from RFC2518 to RFC2518bis:
o Remove own explanation of DTD syntax.
o Remove own definition of precondition/postcondition.
o Remove reference to broken RFC2518 language about DELETE and
UNLOCK.
o Remove own definition of DAV: request header.
o Updated Section 1.2 to reflect the changes in
[draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis], making proposals for more changes
so that the issue can be closed (see also
<http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227> and <
http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/
draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-12.html#rfc.section.5.2>).
Appendix B. Resolved issues (to be removed by RFC Editor before
publication) publication)
Issues that were either rejected or resolved in this version of this
document.
B.1 edit B.1. ED_updates
Type: edit
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003OctDec/
0306.html>
julian.reschke@greenbytes.de (2003-12-30): Shouldn't the BIND spec be
labelled as "updating" RFC2518 and/or RFC3253?
julian.reschke@greenbytes.de (2004-01-05): It seems that there was
consensus to say that BIND does update RFC2518, while there's no
consensus about the relationship to RFC3253. As this is a minor
editorial question, I propose to just say "updated 2518" and to close
the issue.
Resolution (2006-02-07): Previously: State "updates 2518". Changed
to: "updated draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis".
Appendix C. Open issues (to be removed by RFC Editor prior to
publication)
C.1. edit
Type: edit Type: edit
julian.reschke@greenbytes.de (2004-05-30): Umbrella issue for julian.reschke@greenbytes.de (2004-05-30): Umbrella issue for
editorial fixes/enhancements. editorial fixes/enhancements.
julian.reschke@greenbytes.de (2004-07-03): Action item: update C.2. webdav-rev
[draft-mealling-uuid-urn] to RFC4122 once it is published.
Type: edit
julian.reschke@greenbytes.de (2006-01-30): Update from RFC2518 to
RFC2518bis.
Resolution (2006-02-07): Partly resolved: removed own explanation of
DTD syntax, removed own definition of precondition/postcondition,
removed reference to broken RFC2518 language about DELETE and UNLOCK,
removed own definition of DAV: request header, updated "Rationale for
Distinguishing Bindings from URI Mappings" to reflect the changes in
draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-12, making proposals for more changes so
that the issue can be closed (see also
<http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227> and <htt
p://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/
draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-12.html#rfc.section.5.2">).
Index Index
2 2
208 Already Reported (status code) 29 208 Already Reported (status code) 28
5 5
506 Loop Detected (status code) 32 506 Loop Detected (status code) 31
B B
BIND method 20 BIND method 18
Binding 6 Binding 6
C C
Collection 6 Collection 6
Condition Names Condition Names
DAV:bind-into-collection (pre) 21 DAV:bind-into-collection (pre) 19
DAV:bind-source-exists (pre) 21 DAV:bind-source-exists (pre) 19
DAV:binding-allowed (pre) 21 DAV:binding-allowed (pre) 20
DAV:binding-deleted (post) 23, 26 DAV:binding-deleted (post) 22, 25
DAV:can-overwrite (pre) 21, 25 DAV:can-overwrite (pre) 20, 24
DAV:cross-server-binding (pre) 21, 25 DAV:cross-server-binding (pre) 20, 24
DAV:cycle-allowed (pre) 21, 25 DAV:cycle-allowed (pre) 20, 24
DAV:lock-deleted (post) 24, 26 DAV:lock-deleted (post) 22, 25
DAV:locked-overwrite-allowed (pre) 22 DAV:locked-overwrite-allowed (pre) 20
DAV:locked-source-collection-update-allowed (pre) 26 DAV:locked-source-collection-update-allowed (pre) 24
DAV:locked-update-allowed (pre) 21, 23, 25 DAV:locked-update-allowed (pre) 20, 22, 24
DAV:name-allowed (pre) 21, 25 DAV:name-allowed (pre) 20, 24
DAV:new-binding (post) 22, 26 DAV:new-binding (post) 20, 25
DAV:protected-source-url-deletion-allowed (pre) 26 DAV:protected-source-url-deletion-allowed (pre) 25
DAV:protected-url-deletion-allowed (pre) 23 DAV:protected-url-deletion-allowed (pre) 22
DAV:protected-url-modification-allowed (pre) 25 DAV:protected-url-modification-allowed (pre) 24
DAV:rebind-from-collection (pre) 25 DAV:rebind-from-collection (pre) 24
DAV:rebind-source-exists (pre) 25 DAV:rebind-source-exists (pre) 24
DAV:unbind-from-collection (pre) 23 DAV:unbind-from-collection (pre) 22
DAV:unbind-source-exists (pre) 23 DAV:unbind-source-exists (pre) 22
D D
DAV header DAV header
compliance class 'bind' 32 compliance class 'bind' 31
DAV:bind-into-collection precondition 21 DAV:bind-into-collection precondition 19
DAV:bind-source-exists precondition 21 DAV:bind-source-exists precondition 19
DAV:binding-allowed precondition 21 DAV:binding-allowed precondition 20
DAV:binding-deleted postcondition 23, 26 DAV:binding-deleted postcondition 22, 25
DAV:can-overwrite precondition 21, 25 DAV:can-overwrite precondition 20, 24
DAV:cross-server-binding precondition 21, 25 DAV:cross-server-binding precondition 20, 24
DAV:cycle-allowed precondition 21, 25 DAV:cycle-allowed precondition 20, 24
DAV:lock-deleted postcondition 24, 26 DAV:lock-deleted postcondition 22, 25
DAV:locked-overwrite-allowed precondition 22 DAV:locked-overwrite-allowed precondition 20
DAV:locked-source-collection-update-allowed precondition 26 DAV:locked-source-collection-update-allowed precondition 24
DAV:locked-update-allowed precondition 21, 23, 25 DAV:locked-update-allowed precondition 20, 22, 24
DAV:name-allowed precondition 21, 25 DAV:name-allowed precondition 20, 24
DAV:new-binding postcondition 22, 26 DAV:new-binding postcondition 20, 25
DAV:parent-set property 18 DAV:parent-set property 17
DAV:protected-source-url-deletion-allowed precondition 26 DAV:protected-source-url-deletion-allowed precondition 25
DAV:protected-url-deletion-allowed precondition 23 DAV:protected-url-deletion-allowed precondition 22
DAV:protected-url-modification-allowed precondition 25 DAV:protected-url-modification-allowed precondition 24
DAV:rebind-from-collection precondition 25 DAV:rebind-from-collection precondition 24
DAV:rebind-source-exists precondition 25 DAV:rebind-source-exists precondition 24
DAV:resource-id property 18 DAV:resource-id property 17
DAV:unbind-from-collection precondition 23 DAV:unbind-from-collection precondition 22
DAV:unbind-source-exists precondition 23 DAV:unbind-source-exists precondition 22
I I
Internal Member URI 6 Internal Member URI 6
M M
Methods Methods
BIND 20 BIND 18
REBIND 24 REBIND 23
UNBIND 22 UNBIND 21
P P
Path Segment 6 Path Segment 6
Properties Properties
DAV:parent-set 18 DAV:parent-set 17
DAV:resource-id 18 DAV:resource-id 17
R R
REBIND method 24 REBIND method 23
S S
Status Codes Status Codes
208 Already Reported 29 208 Already Reported 28
506 Loop Detected 32 506 Loop Detected 31
U U
UNBIND method 22 UNBIND method 21
URI Mapping 5 URI Mapping 5
Authors' Addresses
Geoffrey Clemm
IBM
20 Maguire Road
Lexington, MA 02421
Email: geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com
Jason Crawford
IBM Research
P.O. Box 704
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
Email: ccjason@us.ibm.com
Julian F. Reschke
greenbytes GmbH
Hafenweg 16
Muenster, NW 48155
Germany
Email: julian.reschke@greenbytes.de
Jim Whitehead
UC Santa Cruz, Dept. of Computer Science
1156 High Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95064
Email: ejw@cse.ucsc.edu
Intellectual Property Statement Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
skipping to change at page 41, line 41 skipping to change at page 42, line 41
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Copyright Statement Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). This document is subject Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). This document is subject
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
Acknowledgment Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society. Internet Society.
 End of changes. 97 change blocks. 
355 lines changed or deleted 381 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.29, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/