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

Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"

From: Daniel LaLiberte <liberte@ncsa.uiuc.edu>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 11:21:59 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199704161621.LAA22810@void.ncsa.uiuc.edu>
To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/3075
http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com writes:
 >  Note that some HTTP/1.0 cache operators have found that it is
 >  dangerous to cache responses to requests for URLs including the
 >  string "cgi-bin".  HTTP/1.1 caches should follow this practice
 >  for responses that do not include an explicit expiration time.
 >  HTTP/1.1 origin servers that want to allow caching of responses
 >  for URLs including "?" or "cgi-bin" SHOULD include an explicit
 >  expiration time.  Explicit expiration times may be specified
 >  using Expires, or the max-age directive of Cache-Control, or
 >  both.

What about Last-modified?  In my use of cgi-bin programs to generate
pages for HyperNews forums and messages, I don't know about the
future, but I know about the past.  Caching is possible, but
If-Modified-Since requests should always be used by cache servers to
find out if there has been a change.  So neither Expires nor max-age
will do what I want.

Received on Wednesday, 16 April 1997 09:24:14 UTC

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