W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: Content-MD5 and partial responses

From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 05:05:54 -0400 (EDT)
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0907030451010.27373@wnl.j3.bet>
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Mark Nottingham wrote:

> However, I'm wondering what a cache should do when combining partial 
> responses that include Content-MD5. This doesn't seem to be addressed in 
> 2616, nor in p5 or p6.

If a cache is aware of partial responses, then we assume that it knows 
about p5 and p6, so it is safe to assume that any rule in the prose will 
be implemented (as opposed to a proxy/cache handling headers without 
knowing their semantic).
So the best course of action would be to add in p5 section 4
<<
    If either requirement is not met, the cache MUST use only the most
    recent partial response (based on the Date values transmitted with
    every response, and using the incoming response if these values are
    equal or missing), and MUST discard the other partial information.
>>
to
<<
    If either requirement is not met, the cache MUST use only the most
    recent partial response (based on the Date values transmitted with
    every response, and using the incoming response if these values are
    equal or missing), and MUST discard the other partial information.

    If Content-MD5 is present in partial responses, it MUST be removed
    in the combined response.
>>

However, it applies also to Content-Length, so should we explicitely state 
how the combination process work ?


-- 
Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras.

         ~~Yves
Received on Friday, 3 July 2009 09:06:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:07 GMT