Subject: [Bug 229] GULP / Lock timeout discussion

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 01:08:51 -0800

http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229

------- Additional Comments From [email-masked]  2006-02-11 01:08 -------
Well, we discussed this very issue yesterday, and Jim explained that the RFC2518
language was there on purpose (allowing servers wide freedom in how they cleanup
locks).

-1 on any change with this at this point of time, in particular as I don't see
any interop problems.

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.