The rfc is super dumb though. For instance, when handling a PROPFIND request (more or less listing files / folders), it’s not mandatory for the server to honor

The rfc is super dumb though. For instance, when handling a PROPFIND request (more or less listing files / folders), it’s not mandatory for the server to honor the Depth header (how many levels are returned). There is also no mechanism for the server to advertise whether or not it’s honoring the Depth header. That means the Depth header is useless because the client has no way to know whether there was only one hierarchy depth or if the server did not honor the Depth header. Therefore, your only option is to always scan the full hierarchy using PROPFIND at each level. The RFC is full of that kind of crazy gotchas, not to mention the overuse of “MAY” or “SHOULD” which will drive you crazy if you try to implement a client / server. If you want to go further in insanity, just look at how crazily over engineered the locking mechanism is. I have no words for it. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4918#section-6 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4918#section-6 Unfortunately, even if you think you implemented the whole rfc correctly, your implementation will work with almost nothing as not that much implementations are any good in the wild. A useful WebDAV implementation must be full of vendor-specific workarounds.