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

Calculation of age headers

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 10:24:38 PDT
Message-Id: <342D4156.47C38ABE@parc.xerox.com>
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
I'm hoping we can resolve this soon, by widening the discussion
from "Roy vs. Jeff" to a larger group. It would be very useful
for HTTP/1.1 implementors to be explicit about their plans and
expectations. Is there some "conservative in what you send
and liberal in what you accept (or expect)" possible compromise
here?

Comment from Ari:

> ---
> I much prefer Fielding's draft where all proxies that generate the
> response from their cache must add an Age: header.
> 
> I don't want to require *all* proxies, including non-caching ones, to
> add the Age: header, which is what Mogul's draft suggests.  Since it's
> just tunneling it doesn't really add any information that the upstream
> proxy wouldn't be able to derive from its network delay.  Furthermore,
> this wouldn't affect just non-caching proxies, but also requests that
> we'd like to tunnel without caching in a caching proxy.
Received on Saturday, 27 September 1997 23:00:34 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:33:01 EDT