- From: Fisher Mark <FisherM@exch1.indy.tce.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 12:59:37 -0500
- To: "'vinodv@microsoft.com'" <vinodv@microsoft.com>, "'dmk@research.bell-labs.com'" <dmk@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: "'http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com'" <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com>
Dave, you wrote: >Your experience may depend on what origin servers your proxy acts as >proxy for. None of the (HTTP/1.0) CGIs I've written (on Unix systems) >produce any headers that would indicate anything about cachability. >But they also don't contain Last-Modified. I think that's typical of >Unix-based servers and their CGIs. I am not sure what is typical, but I have two CGI applications on our Intranet (our Corporate Technical Memory electronic reference document repository and our CAD Productivity Tools home-grown CAD tools interface), both of which use caching control headers. For CTM, cache control is used to enforce data freshness as the repository database can be updated at any time. With the CAD Productivity Tools web, we must authenticate users (using a home-brew variation on Digest Authentication), so we need to keep the authentication cookie fairly fresh to discourage session hijacking. I would honestly expect to use cache control on any CGI that makes database queries, unless the database was entirely and only controlled by the CGI program. ================================================ Mark Leighton Fisher Thomson Consumer Electronics fisherm@indy.tce.com Indianapolis, IN "ViaCrypt? Vhy not!"
Received on Thursday, 17 April 1997 11:02:56 UTC