- 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>
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 UTC