Re: [core] Spencer Dawkins' Discuss on draft-ietf-core-etch-03: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Thu, 13 October 2016 11:15 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5467212972E; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 04:15:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ti3yZs-5urJD; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 04:15:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 137E312966D; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 04:15:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de
Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u9DBEvsu019145; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 13:14:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from nar-4.local (p5DC7E34C.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.227.76]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3svp6T36vjz3Plg; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 13:14:57 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <57FF6CF3.7090703@tzi.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 13:16:03 +0200
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.8 (Macintosh/20151105)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
References: <147628802464.6377.2774521252462284021.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <3ad76e63e6f6b955b5373a5521bcca98@xs4all.nl> <1476356714.1601674.754646289.1E106782@webmail.messagingengine.com>
In-Reply-To: <1476356714.1601674.754646289.1E106782@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/D5zzuxXa5sbPTPL--c8sA8JjX54>
Cc: core-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-core-etch@ietf.org, Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, core@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [core] Spencer Dawkins' Discuss on draft-ietf-core-etch-03: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 11:15:11 -0000

Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> Does this mean that a client that wants doesn't care about idempotency
> of its request might need to try PATCH, then discover that it is not
> supported and then retry iPATCH?

How does it know that the server supports one of these methods (PATCH,
iPATCH) in the first place, and what media types to use with one of
these?  This is usually found out using discovery (for an example, see
the form relations concept introduced in draft-hartke-core-apps).  This
discovery would also tell the client which specific method to use, so
there is no need for trial and error.

What we could add is a recommendation for servers to always support both
methods (that is not hard to do, because what follows), and emphasize
that there is no particular onus *on the server* to check the client's
intention that the request be idempotent.

Grüße, Carsten