W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 1997


From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:43:17 +0100 (MET)
Message-Id: <199701310843.JAA20271@wsooti08.win.tue.nl>
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Cc: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/2313

I just read draft-mogul-http-revalidate-00.txt, and want to express my
support for this document.  While I don't think that things will get
dangerously inefficient if the editorial error in the HTTP/1.1
specification is not fixed, fixing the error is the best thing to do.

I too think that proxy-maxage is the preferred solution, if it can be
applied before permanent deployment of 1.1 clients.



I do not want to rule out that future developments will show that it
would be a good thing to have version numbers with some different
interpretation in HTTP responses.  If this is the case, a new HTTP
header which contains these different version numbers should be

Received on Friday, 31 January 1997 00:53:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:19 UTC