Hi, I'm looking at a strange little scenario with a client trying to sync with the CalendarServer. It goes like this, in summary: C: REPORT:calendar-query /calendars/users/me@domain/calendar/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- <?xml version="1.0"?> <C:calendar-query xmlns:C="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:caldav"> <D:prop xmlns:D="DAV:"> <D:getetag/> </D:prop> <C:filter> <C:comp-filter name="VCALENDAR"> <C:comp-filter name="VEVENT"> <C:time-range start="20160611T000000Z" end="20170207T000000Z"/> </C:comp-filter> </C:comp-filter> </C:filter> </C:calendar-query> ----------------------------------------------------------------- S: 207 - Here's a bunch of hrefs of the form: <href>/calendars/users/me%40domain/calendar/blabla.ics</href> C: REPORT:calendar-multiget /calendars/users/me@domain/calendar/ <href>/calendars/users/me%40domain/calendar/blabla.ics</href ... ================================================================= Now ... it's clear from https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4918#section-8.3 that the last request is illegal. Or rather... if one parses the URL comparison rules it seems to say that the Request-URI and the <href> should be octet-by-octet compared, so "@" != "%40" here. However... (and this is the question) ... I'm a little in doubt about how to interpret RFC4918, section 8.3 wrt. which rules the server should obey wrt. the Request-URI when formulating the response. Is the server allowed to respond with <href>/%40</href> when the Request-URI was /@ ? regards, Peter Mogensen