On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > I have a question regarding unsupported methods in <LIMIT> directives.
> >
> > Let's say that you could limit arbitrary methods that different modules
> > have implemented. For this example, a module has defined a new method FOO,
> > but no module handles method FOO2:
> >
> > In the cconfig file:
> >
> >
> > <LIMIT FOO FOO2>
> > ...
> > </LIMIT>
> >
> > What would the correct behavior be if a user made a request with method
> > FOO2? It seems to me that according to the RFC, it should ignore this
> > Limit directive and return 501 (not implemented) instead of 401 (auth
> > required) or 405 (method not allowed).
>
> If the server has a limit directive with the method name, then it knows
> the method and has therefore implemented it. The module determines what
> is allowed per resource, not per server, so either 401 or 405 should be
> returned.
>
> ....Roy
>
>
It doesn't logically follow that just because the server has a <limit>
directive with that method name, it necessarily implements that method.
As stated in the example, the server has definitely not implemented method
FOO2, but it has been entered in a LIMIT config directive. To rephrase the
question, what would the correct behavior be for a server responding to
request methods that were LIMITED but not implemented?
It seems to me that 501 is more appropriate.
regards,
--
Cody Sherr
Engineer
Covalent Technologies
phone: (415)536-5292
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
