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

Re: caching CGI responses

From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 11:03:35 +0100 (MET)
Message-Id: <199612061003.LAA01936@wsooti04.win.tue.nl>
To: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
Cc: advax@triumf.ca, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/2038
Jeffrey Mogul:
>However, because most existing caches were designed before HTTP/1.1,
>and do not expect servers to generate Expires headers (most servers
>apparently do not), they often cache responses that have neither
>a Last-Modified header or an Expires header.

I think there are very few existing 1.0 proxies that cache responses without
a Last-Modified header.  Doing would cause problems with a large fraction of
all CGI-based stuff, and this would get noticed very quickly by the cache

I believe the AOL cache does (or did at some point) cache everything for a
few minutes at least, no matter what the headers, but proxies on the `real'
internet generally tend to err on the conservative side.


Received on Friday, 6 December 1996 03:03:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:18 UTC