Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ldup-lcup-04.txt

[John Merrells <merrells@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hmm. I can't resist dipping into this thread.

> The most obvious problems are with the requests for content
> refresh.
>
> Without historical information, 
In a state-based system the state records the history.

> a server has no means to
> determine whether or not an entry whose state indicates it was
> updated (add,modify,rename) since the previous refresh
> request has left the content.  It can only determine whether
> the updated entry is currently in the content or not.  The
> server must assume the entry was previously in the content.
> Hence, the server must generate a message (update or entryLeft)
> for each updated entry in the context or require a reload.
A state-based system can record the deleted/left entires in its state.

> But worse, if any entry was deleted from the context, a
> server which maintains no historical information is forced
> to respond that a reload is required.
Too bad. The server implementation is up to the server implementor. The
server can store no state, some state, or all state. The trade off is server
storage and server code complexity against client efficiency,

John