draft-ietf-webdav-bind-18.txt   draft-ietf-webdav-bind-19.txt 
Network Working Group G. Clemm Network Working Group G. Clemm
Internet-Draft IBM Internet-Draft IBM
Updates: J. Crawford Updates: 4918 (if approved) J. Crawford
draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis IBM Research Intended status: Standards Track IBM Research
(if approved) J. Reschke, Ed. Expires: January 4, 2008 J. Reschke, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track greenbytes greenbytes
Expires: September 14, 2007 J. Whitehead J. Whitehead
U.C. Santa Cruz U.C. Santa Cruz
March 13, 2007 July 3, 2007
Binding Extensions to Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV) Binding Extensions to Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV)
draft-ietf-webdav-bind-18 draft-ietf-webdav-bind-19
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 September 14, 2007. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 4, 2008.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
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.
skipping to change at page 2, line 22 skipping to change at page 2, line 22
joined by sending a message with subject "subscribe" to joined by sending a message with subject "subscribe" to
<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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2. Method Preconditions and Postconditions . . . . . . . . . 6 1.2. Method Preconditions and Postconditions . . . . . . . . . 7
2. Overview of Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2. Overview of Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1. Bindings to Collections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.1. Bindings to Collections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1.1. Bind loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.1.1. Bind loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2. URI Mappings Created by a new Binding . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.2. URI Mappings Created by a new Binding . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3. COPY and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.3. COPY and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3.1. Example: COPY with 'Depth: infinity' in presence 2.3.1. Example: COPY with 'Depth: infinity' in presence
of bind loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 of bind loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 bindings to a leaf resource . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.4. DELETE and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.4. DELETE and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.5. MOVE and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.5. MOVE and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.6. PROPFIND and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.6. PROPFIND and Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.7. Determining Whether Two Bindings Are to the Same 2.7. Determining Whether Two Bindings Are to the Same
Resource . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Resource . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.8. Discovering the Bindings to a Resource . . . . . . . . . . 16 2.8. Discovering the Bindings to a Resource . . . . . . . . . . 17
3. Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3. Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
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 . . . . . . . . . 18
4. BIND Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 4. BIND Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
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 9. Relationship to WebDAV Access Control Protocol . . . . . . . . 33
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
10.1. Privacy Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 10.1. Privacy Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
10.2. Bind Loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 10.2. Bind Loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
10.3. Bindings, and Denial of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 10.3. Bindings, and Denial of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
10.4. Private Locations May Be Revealed . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 10.4. Private Locations May Be Revealed . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
10.5. DAV:parent-set and Denial of Service . . . . . . . . . . . 33 10.5. DAV:parent-set and Denial of Service . . . . . . . . . . . 34
11. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 11. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
13. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 13. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
14.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 14.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Appendix A. Clarification to RFC2518bis' Usage of the term Appendix A. Clarification to RFC2518bis' Usage of the term
'lock root' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 'lock root' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Appendix B. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before Appendix B. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before
publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
B.1. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 B.1. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
B.2. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 B.2. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
B.3. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 B.3. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
B.4. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 B.4. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
B.5. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 B.5. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
B.6. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 B.6. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
B.7. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 B.7. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
B.8. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 B.8. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
B.9. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 B.9. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
B.10. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 B.10. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
B.11. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 B.11. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
B.12. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 B.12. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
B.13. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 B.13. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
B.14. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 B.14. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
B.15. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 B.15. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
B.16. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 B.16. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Appendix C. Open issues (to be removed by RFC Editor prior to B.17. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Appendix C. Resolved issues (to be removed by RFC Editor
C.1. edit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 before publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 C.1. rfc4918 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Appendix D. Open issues (to be removed by RFC Editor prior to
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 42 publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
D.1. edit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 43
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This specification extends the WebDAV Distributed Authoring Protocol This specification extends the WebDAV Distributed Authoring Protocol
([draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis]) to enable clients to create new ([RFC4918]) to enable clients to create new access paths to existing
access paths to existing resources. This capability is useful for resources. This capability is useful for several reasons:
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 42 skipping to change at page 5, line 41
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 [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] resources. HTTP [RFC2616] and WebDAV [RFC4918] methods are able to
methods are able to work because there are mappings between URIs and work because there are mappings between URIs and resources. A method
resources. A method is addressed to a URI, and the server follows is addressed to a URI, and the server follows the mapping from that
the mapping from that URI to a resource, applying the method to that URI to a resource, applying the method to that resource. Multiple
resource. Multiple URIs may be mapped to the same resource, but URIs may be mapped to the same resource, but until now there has been
until now there has been no way for clients to create additional URIs no way for clients to create additional URIs mapped to existing
mapped to existing resources. 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 30 skipping to change at page 6, line 29
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 Distributed Authoring Protocol specification [RFC4918].
[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 notational This document uses XML DTD fragments ([XML]) as a notational
convention, using the rules defined in Section 17 of convention, using the rules defined in Section 17 of [RFC4918].
[draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis].
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
skipping to change at page 6, line 40 skipping to change at page 7, line 37
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. Method Preconditions and Postconditions 1.2. Method Preconditions and Postconditions
See Section 16 of [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] for the definitions See Section 16 of [RFC4918] for the definitions of "precondition" and
of "precondition" and "postcondition". "postcondition".
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 9, line 30 skipping to change at page 10, line 30
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 9.8 of [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis], COPY As defined in Section 9.8 of [RFC4918], COPY causes the resource
causes the resource identified by the Request-URI to be duplicated, identified by the Request-URI to be duplicated, and makes the new
and makes the new resource accessible using the URI specified in the resource accessible using the URI specified in the Destination
Destination header. Upon successful completion of a COPY, a new header. Upon successful completion of a COPY, a new binding is
binding is created between the last path segment of the Destination created between the last path segment of the Destination header, and
header, and the destination resource. The new binding is added to the destination resource. The new binding is added to its parent
its parent collection, identified by the Destination header minus its collection, identified by the Destination header minus its final
final segment. 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 [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] makes it clear definition of Depth in [RFC4918] makes it clear that a "Depth: 0"
that a "Depth: 0" request does not apply to a collection's members. request does not apply to a collection's members. Consequently, a
Consequently, a COPY with "Depth: 0" does not duplicate the bindings COPY with "Depth: 0" does not duplicate the bindings contained by the
contained by the collection. 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
skipping to change at page 14, line 30 skipping to change at page 15, line 30
"/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 [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] allows a its final segment. Although [RFC4918] allows a DELETE to be a non-
DELETE to be a non-atomic operation, when the DELETE operation is atomic operation, when the DELETE operation is implemented as an
implemented as an UNBIND, the operation is atomic. In particular, a UNBIND, the operation is atomic. In particular, a DELETE on a
DELETE on a hierarchy of resources is simply the removal of a binding hierarchy of resources is simply the removal of a binding to the
to the collection identified by the Request-URI. 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 be implemented as a REBIND request. Although [RFC4918] allows a MOVE
[draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] allows a MOVE to be a non-atomic to be a non-atomic operation, when the MOVE operation is implemented
operation, when the MOVE operation is implemented as a REBIND, the as a REBIND, the operation is atomic. In particular, applying a MOVE
operation is atomic. In particular, applying a MOVE to a Request-URI to a Request-URI and a Destination URI has the effect of removing a
and a Destination URI has the effect of removing a binding to a binding to a resource (at the Request-URI), and creating a new
resource (at the Request-URI), and creating a new binding to that binding to that resource (at the Destination URI). Even when the
resource (at the Destination URI). Even when the Request-URI Request-URI identifies a collection, the MOVE operation involves only
identifies a collection, the MOVE operation involves only removing removing one binding to that collection and adding another.
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 15, line 40 skipping to change at page 16, line 39
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 [draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis], the value of a dead Consistent with [RFC4918], the value of a dead property MUST be
property MUST be independent of the number of bindings to its host independent of the number of bindings to its host resource or of the
resource or of the path submitted to PROPFIND. On the other hand, path submitted to PROPFIND. On the other hand, the behaviour for
the behaviour for each live property depends on its individual each live property depends on its individual definition (for example,
definition (for example, see [RFC3744], Section 5, paragraph 2). see [RFC3744], Section 5, paragraph 2).
2.7. 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
skipping to change at page 17, line 12 skipping to change at page 18, line 12
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 [RFC4122] or the opaquelocktoken: URI scheme defined in [RFC4918]).
[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
skipping to change at page 19, line 16 skipping to change at page 20, 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 10.6 of Overwrite header defined in Section 10.6 of [RFC4918].
[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.
skipping to change at page 31, line 41 skipping to change at page 32, line 41
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 name "bind" as a field in the "DAV" response header (see [RFC4918],
[draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis], Section 10.1) from an OPTIONS request Section 10.1) from an OPTIONS request on any resource implemented by
on any resource implemented by that server. A value of "bind" in the that server. A value of "bind" in the "DAV" header MUST indicate
"DAV" header MUST indicate that the server supports all MUST level that the server supports all MUST level requirements and REQUIRED
requirements and REQUIRED features specified in this document. features specified in this document.
8.2. 'DAV' request header 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
skipping to change at page 33, line 23 skipping to change at page 34, line 23
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 All internationalization considerations mentioned in [RFC4918] also
[draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] also apply to this document. apply to this document.
12. IANA Considerations 12. IANA Considerations
Section 7 defines the HTTP status codes 208 (Already Reported) and Section 7 defines the HTTP status codes 208 (Already Reported) and
506 (Loop Detected), to be added to the registry at 506 (Loop Detected), to be added to the registry at
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/http-status-codes>. <http://www.iana.org/assignments/http-status-codes>.
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
skipping to change at page 34, line 18 skipping to change at page 35, line 18
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[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.
[RFC4918] Dusseault, L., Ed., "HTTP Extensions for Web Distributed
Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV)", RFC 4918, June 2007.
[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 (Fourth F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fourth
Edition)", W3C REC-xml-20060816, August 2006, Edition)", W3C REC-xml-20060816, August 2006,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816>. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816>.
[draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis]
Dusseault, L., Ed., "HTTP Extensions for Distributed
Authoring - WebDAV RFC2518 bis",
draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-18 (work in progress),
February 2007.
14.2. Informative References 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.
Appendix A. Clarification to RFC2518bis' Usage of the term 'lock root' Appendix A. Clarification to RFC2518bis' Usage of the term 'lock root'
[draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis], Section 9.10.1 claims: [RFC4918], Section 9.10.1 claims:
A LOCK request to an existing resource will create a lock on the A LOCK request to an existing resource will create a lock on the
resource identified by the Request-URI, provided the resource is resource identified by the Request-URI, provided the resource is
not already locked with a conflicting lock. The resource not already locked with a conflicting lock. The resource
identified in the Request-URI becomes the root of the lock. identified in the Request-URI becomes the root of the lock.
This is incorrect in that it implies that the "lock root" is a This is incorrect in that it implies that the "lock root" is a
resource, not a URL resource, not a URL
(<http://ietf.osafoundation.org:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=251>). (<http://ietf.osafoundation.org:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=251>).
However, should a directly locked resource have multiple bindings, However, should a directly locked resource have multiple bindings,
skipping to change at page 35, line 21 skipping to change at page 36, line 18
A correct description would be: A correct description would be:
A LOCK request to an existing resource will create a lock on the A LOCK request to an existing resource will create a lock on the
resource identified by the Request-URI, provided the resource is resource identified by the Request-URI, provided the resource is
not already locked with a conflicting lock. The Request-URI not already locked with a conflicting lock. The Request-URI
becomes the root of the lock. becomes the root of the lock.
Note that this change makes the description consistent with the Note that this change makes the description consistent with the
definition of the DAV:lockroot XML element in Section 14.12 of definition of the DAV:lockroot XML element in Section 14.12 of
[draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis]. [RFC4918].
The authors of this specification recommend that future revisions of The authors of this specification recommend that future revisions of
[draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis] will update the description as [RFC4918] will update the description as suggested above.
suggested above.
Appendix B. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication) Appendix B. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)
B.1. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-02 B.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)".
skipping to change at page 38, line 23 skipping to change at page 39, line 23
B.15. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-16 B.15. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-16
Add and resolve issue "iana-vs-http-status". Add and resolve issue "iana-vs-http-status".
B.16. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-17 B.16. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-17
Update rfc2518bis reference to draft 18 (note that the bug reported Update rfc2518bis reference to draft 18 (note that the bug reported
in <http://ietf.osafoundation.org:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=251> in <http://ietf.osafoundation.org:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=251>
is still present). is still present).
Appendix C. Open issues (to be removed by RFC Editor prior to B.17. Since draft-ietf-webdav-bind-18
Update: draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis replaced by RFC4918.
Appendix C. Resolved issues (to be removed by RFC Editor before
publication) publication)
C.1. edit Issues that were either rejected or resolved in this version of this
document.
C.1. rfc4918
Type: edit
julian.reschke@greenbytes.de (2007-06-30): Update RFC2518bis
reference to RFC4918.
Resolution (2007-06-30): Done.
Appendix D. Open issues (to be removed by RFC Editor prior to
publication)
D.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.
Index Index
2 2
208 Already Reported (status code) 28, 33 208 Already Reported (status code) 29, 34
5 5
506 Loop Detected (status code) 31, 33 506 Loop Detected (status code) 32, 34
B B
BIND method 18 BIND method 19
Marshalling 19 Marshalling 20
Postconditions 20 Postconditions 21
Preconditions 19 Preconditions 20
Binding 6 Binding 7
C C
Collection 6 Collection 7
Condition Names Condition Names
DAV:bind-into-collection (pre) 19 DAV:bind-into-collection (pre) 20
DAV:bind-source-exists (pre) 19 DAV:bind-source-exists (pre) 20
DAV:binding-allowed (pre) 20 DAV:binding-allowed (pre) 21
DAV:binding-deleted (post) 22, 25 DAV:binding-deleted (post) 23, 26
DAV:can-overwrite (pre) 20, 24 DAV:can-overwrite (pre) 21, 25
DAV:cross-server-binding (pre) 20, 24 DAV:cross-server-binding (pre) 21, 25
DAV:cycle-allowed (pre) 20, 24 DAV:cycle-allowed (pre) 21, 25
DAV:lock-deleted (post) 22, 25 DAV:lock-deleted (post) 23, 26
DAV:locked-overwrite-allowed (pre) 20 DAV:locked-overwrite-allowed (pre) 21
DAV:locked-source-collection-update-allowed (pre) 24 DAV:locked-source-collection-update-allowed (pre) 25
DAV:locked-update-allowed (pre) 20, 22, 24 DAV:locked-update-allowed (pre) 21, 23, 25
DAV:name-allowed (pre) 20, 24 DAV:name-allowed (pre) 21, 25
DAV:new-binding (post) 20, 25 DAV:new-binding (post) 21, 26
DAV:protected-source-url-deletion-allowed (pre) 25 DAV:protected-source-url-deletion-allowed (pre) 26
DAV:protected-url-deletion-allowed (pre) 22 DAV:protected-url-deletion-allowed (pre) 23
DAV:protected-url-modification-allowed (pre) 24 DAV:protected-url-modification-allowed (pre) 25
DAV:rebind-from-collection (pre) 24 DAV:rebind-from-collection (pre) 25
DAV:rebind-source-exists (pre) 24 DAV:rebind-source-exists (pre) 25
DAV:unbind-from-collection (pre) 22 DAV:unbind-from-collection (pre) 23
DAV:unbind-source-exists (pre) 22 DAV:unbind-source-exists (pre) 23
D D
DAV header DAV header
compliance class 'bind' 31 compliance class 'bind' 32
DAV:bind-into-collection precondition 19 DAV:bind-into-collection precondition 20
DAV:bind-source-exists precondition 19 DAV:bind-source-exists precondition 20
DAV:binding-allowed precondition 20 DAV:binding-allowed precondition 21
DAV:binding-deleted postcondition 22, 25 DAV:binding-deleted postcondition 23, 26
DAV:can-overwrite precondition 20, 24 DAV:can-overwrite precondition 21, 25
DAV:cross-server-binding precondition 20, 24 DAV:cross-server-binding precondition 21, 25
DAV:cycle-allowed precondition 20, 24 DAV:cycle-allowed precondition 21, 25
DAV:lock-deleted postcondition 22, 25 DAV:lock-deleted postcondition 23, 26
DAV:locked-overwrite-allowed precondition 20 DAV:locked-overwrite-allowed precondition 21
DAV:locked-source-collection-update-allowed precondition 24 DAV:locked-source-collection-update-allowed precondition 25
DAV:locked-update-allowed precondition 20, 22, 24 DAV:locked-update-allowed precondition 21, 23, 25
DAV:name-allowed precondition 20, 24 DAV:name-allowed precondition 21, 25
DAV:new-binding postcondition 20, 25 DAV:new-binding postcondition 21, 26
DAV:parent-set property 17 DAV:parent-set property 18
DAV:protected-source-url-deletion-allowed precondition 25 DAV:protected-source-url-deletion-allowed precondition 26
DAV:protected-url-deletion-allowed precondition 22 DAV:protected-url-deletion-allowed precondition 23
DAV:protected-url-modification-allowed precondition 24 DAV:protected-url-modification-allowed precondition 25
DAV:rebind-from-collection precondition 24 DAV:rebind-from-collection precondition 25
DAV:rebind-source-exists precondition 24 DAV:rebind-source-exists precondition 25
DAV:resource-id property 17 DAV:resource-id property 18
DAV:unbind-from-collection precondition 22 DAV:unbind-from-collection precondition 23
DAV:unbind-source-exists precondition 22 DAV:unbind-source-exists precondition 23
I I
Internal Member URI 6 Internal Member URI 7
M M
Methods Methods
BIND 18 BIND 19
REBIND 23 REBIND 24
UNBIND 21 UNBIND 22
P P
Path Segment 6 Path Segment 6
Properties Properties
DAV:parent-set 17 DAV:parent-set 18
DAV:resource-id 17 DAV:resource-id 18
R R
REBIND method 23 REBIND method 24
Marshalling 23 Marshalling 24
Postconditions 25 Postconditions 26
Preconditions 24 Preconditions 25
S S
Status Codes Status Codes
208 Already Reported 28, 33 208 Already Reported 29, 34
506 Loop Detected 31, 33 506 Loop Detected 32, 34
U U
UNBIND method 21 UNBIND method 22
Marshalling 21 Marshalling 22
Postconditions 22 Postconditions 23
Preconditions 22 Preconditions 23
URI Mapping 5 URI Mapping 6
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Geoffrey Clemm Geoffrey Clemm
IBM IBM
20 Maguire Road 20 Maguire Road
Lexington, MA 02421 Lexington, MA 02421
Email: geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com Email: geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com
Jason Crawford Jason Crawford
IBM Research IBM Research
P.O. Box 704 P.O. Box 704
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
Email: ccjason@us.ibm.com Email: ccjason@us.ibm.com
Julian F. Reschke (editor) Julian F. Reschke (editor)
greenbytes GmbH greenbytes GmbH
Hafenweg 16 Hafenweg 16
 End of changes. 44 change blocks. 
217 lines changed or deleted 231 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.33. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/