W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1996

cacheability of response codes.

From: Paul Leach <paulle@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 16:24:22 -0700
Message-Id: <c=US%a=_%p=msft%l=RED-77-MSG-960529232422Z-3650@abash1.microsoft.com>
To: "'http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com'" <http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/590
Section 10.3.2 of "almost draft 4" says that 301 (Moved Permanently)
responses are cacheable unless indicated otherwise.  Section 13.7.1 says
only 200 and 206 are cacheable unless Expires or Cache-Control
explicitly allows it.

I believe that section 13.7.1 is the one that is inconsistent with the
concensus intent.

Fix: change

A response received with a status code of 200 or 206 may be stored by a
cache and used in reply to a subsequent request, subject to the
expiration mechanism, unless a Cache-Control directive prohibits
caching.  

to

A response received with a status code of 200, 206 or 301 may be stored
by a cache and used in reply to a subsequent request, subject to the
expiration mechanism, unless a Cache-Control directive prohibits
caching.  

Paul
----------------------------------------------------
Paul J. Leach            Email: paulle@microsoft.com
Microsoft                Phone: 1-206-882-8080
1 Microsoft Way          Fax:   1-206-936-7329
Redmond, WA 98052
Received on Wednesday, 29 May 1996 16:45:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:17 UTC