W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1995

Re: A modest proposal

From: Shel Kaphan <sjk@amazon.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 16:35:06 -0700
Message-Id: <199508182335.QAA01298@bert.amazon.com>
To: Roy Fielding <fielding@beach.w3.org>
Cc: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
 >     Date:                (no change necessary)
 >     Expires:             (no change necessary)
 >     Last-Modified:       specify that LM > server time must not be given
 >     If-Modified-Since:   specify that IMS > server time is invalid
 >     Pragma:              add "no-cache", "private", and "max-age"
 >     Content-MD5:         no problemo
 >     Content-CRC:         no problemo
 >     Transfer-Encoding:   chunked
 > >	
 > >	The Expiration header looks like this:
 > >  	    Expiration-info: Expires-time server-current-time
 > Unnecessary. That is why Date is given in responses.

These comments, and some in Jeff Mogul's thought-experiment, made me
realize that the "argument" about discarding "future" Last-Modified's and
not caching the accompanying documents is somewhat of a red herring if
the implementation is "good" (where I get to define "good" :)).

	It is not possible to reliably compare times from two different,
	unsynchronized, clocks. So, don't do it.  (Not naively, anyway).

Regarding Last-Modifieds "in the future", Last-Modified should be
ignored if the timestamp is later than the accompanying Date response
header.  Then it is certainly invalid.  But it can't be reliably
compared to the local clock without appropriate adjustment.  So,
subject to the following being adopted I'll agree with Larry
Masinter's rules.

The following is a proposal, so when I say "should" here, I mean in the
context of this proposal, ok?

If a server sends an expires header that is 30 seconds in the future,
it means the future as it knows it.  So, when a downstream server
receives Expires, it should interpret that in local time using (some
function of) the delta between the accompanying Date header and
its own clock.

A cache should keep track of the delta between a server's clock (as
returned by Date) and its own clock, and include (some function of)
that delta in any communication with that server involving timestamps.

There is some complication with GET-IMS requests being passed along
from downstream servers.  An intermediate proxy cannot tell whether
the date in an IMS request is given in the upstream server's
coordinates (e.g. an upstream LM header being returned in an IMS
request) or in the downstream server's coordinates (e.g. "get me
something if it has changed in the past 15 minutes").

When proxies pass through requests or responses including timestamps
such as GET if-modified-since, last-modified, and expires, I propose
that they should normalize the times to their own clocks, using an
unspecified algorithm they determine, which is a function of the delta
between local time and the Date header passed by the server, and may
include information on round-trip delays accumulated over time.  This
way, for instance, a downstream server's GET-IMS request or an
upstream server's Expires header can be translated to be in local
time system.

So, here is a PROPOSAL:

For this reason, I propose that whenever requests or responses
containing these timestamps are generated, that a Date header should be
REQUIRED, and should indicate the moment the request or response 
is transmitted.


Assume 0 delays everywhere for simplicity.
In this example the RECEIVERs do all time adjustments in both
directions.  That is not the only way this could work.

Client C		Proxy P			Server S
12:00			12:01			11:59
-----			-----			-----
GET -->			--> GET -->		Process GET,
						issue headers	
						Date: 11:59
						last-modified: 10:00
			Receive Date 11:59
			Delta for server S = 
			12:01 - 11:59 = +2 minutes
			rewrite headers:				
			Last-modified: 10:02
Receive Date 12:01
Delta for Proxy P = 
12:00 - 12:01 = -1 minute
interpret headers:
date: 12:00

12:05			12:06			12:04
-----			-----			-----
GET IMS 10:01 -->
			Receive Date:12:05
			Translate IMS header
			Using +1 minute delta,
			translate IMS header to
			GET IMS 10:02	-->	Receive Date: 12:06.
						Use -2 minute delta to
						interpret IMS header
						as GET IMS 10:00.

One problem with this is that due to inevitable inaccuracies in the
delta computations, an IMS request might differ from the LM that it
corresponds to.  So, in the long term, some cookie other than
a timestamp is a better way to go for such return-trip operations,
as both Jeff Mogul and I previously suggested. 

--Shel Kaphan
Received on Friday, 18 August 1995 16:40:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:14 UTC