W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: Proposal for i23: no-store invalidation

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:28:16 +0200
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1208420896.30744.9.camel@hlaptop.henriknordstrom.net>

ons 2008-04-16 klockan 18:58 -0700 skrev Mark Nottingham:

> Can you give some examples? 4xx to a GET shouldn't invalidate the  
> cache, and a cache is allowed to return a cached response when  
> encountering a 5xx unless must-revalidate is present.

I am not talking about error responses. I am talking about this text
which currently is only specified for HEAD and not GET:

   If the new field values
   indicate that the cached entity differs from the current entity (as
   would be indicated by a change in Content-Length, Content-MD5, ETag
   or Last-Modified), then the cache MUST treat the cache entry as
   stale.

It's a equally good rule for GET as for HEAD, and having them aligned
would help getting rid of cornercases such as the i23 question.

> In any case, I believe we can close this issue with no spec change; we  
> may change text regarding cache invalidation separately.

Yes. i23 requires no change. This is a separate but quite related issue.

Regards
Henrik
Received on Thursday, 17 April 2008 08:32:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:47 GMT