Re: Updated PATCH draft

Subject: Re: Updated PATCH draft

From: "Subbu Allamaraju" <subbu.allamaraju@xxxxxxxxx>

Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 15:03:47 -0800

Cc: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@xxxxxx>, atom-protocol <atom-protocol@xxxxxxx>

Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=68w6EH1Ze3X3xUG3DmZa3m2KPJASXlkCxEzcibDpasA=; b=C0Gn4qLGt5zpJwBQoaGcnqpSn/nm2mIETbVPy7GNCJ2L+hGL4c5CimIDz3lJMBO5qdqpRlrqnO8mrlPHSMCi0PqEY+bqsA3LA5I7UuxxXxp//oyD3OS+pH5oaQiiCsPSmvf2SxQUXuNDA8q2izYB3cWwTL3TmACYIe7jej6VfT8=

Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=gP6iuoPdcdoglPK4O/lOayNxUdmZ1C+VzC8HLdTE4Lo6vEt3sL4OIcR8E33GkFAnNEPlYOirJWyZIKuQE/6nyhxGGL1KVW8LoZec+QZTx36x9iGph/Y2Asw088cuLjXAraQeWRFvI1PHgdT1d0OIkX7mNbqEKpYZs8Vruq9Y258=

In-reply-to: <47237D15.10206@xxxxxxxxx>

List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-protocol/mail-archive/>

List-id: <atom-protocol.imc.org>

List-unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-protocol-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>

References: <47237D15.10206@xxxxxxxxx>

Sender: owner-atom-protocol@xxxxxxxxxxxx

I have a comment on this paragraph of this draft.

"Clients are advised to take caution when sending multiple PATCH requests, or sequences of requests that include PATCH, over a pipelined connection as there are no guarantees that pipelined requests will be processed by the server in the same order in which the client sends them."

Since 2616 says that clients SHOULD NOT pipeline non-idempotent methods, and since PATCH is a non-idempotent method, any reason why a similar conformance level is not presented here? Secondly, are there cases when pipelined requests will be processed out of order? 2616 explicitly prohibits sending responses out of order ( 8.1.1.2).

Regards,

Subbu

On Oct 27, 2007 10:01 AM, James M Snell < jasnell@xxxxxxxxx > wrote:

An updated PATCH draft is available.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-dusseault-http-patch-10.txt

Main changes include:

* Removing the Prefer header (now published as a separate I-D)
* Minor restructuring of the doc
* Some editorial changes

- James

Follow-Ups:

Re: Updated PATCH draft
- From: James M Snell

References:

Updated PATCH draft
- From: James M Snell