- From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 19:35:38 +0200 (MET DST)
- To: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
- Cc: frystyk@w3.org, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
Jeffrey Mogul: > >Proposed changes to Section 13.6, 4th Paragraph: > >RFC2068: > > The Vary header field may also inform the cache that the [...] > >Henrik proposed: > > The Vary header field MUST also inform the cache that the [...] >Koen changed one word: > > The Vary header field MUST also inform the cache *if* the Reading this again, I just noticed that the change from `may' to `MUST' also requires that the modifier `if the response is cachable' be added. So: >I think the first part is still somewhat misleading. How about: > > If the representation was selected using criteria not limited to > the request-headers, then the server MUST include a "Vary: *" > header field in the response. Change to '.. in the response if it is cachable'. > In this case, a cache MUST NOT use the response in > a reply to a subsequent request unless the cache relays the new > request to the origin server in a conditional request and the > server responds with 304 (Not Modified), including an entity tag or > Content-Location that indicates which entity should be used. > >As long as we are going to say MUST, we should be explicit about >what the requirement is. > >-Jeff Koen.
Received on Thursday, 10 July 1997 10:38:42 UTC