W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 11:19:08 +1100
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <74C7967B-4CF8-4AB6-83FE-AA85DD6223DD@mnot.net>
To: "Eric J. Bowman" <eric@bisonsystems.net>
In a request?

On 18/10/2010, at 11:17 AM, Eric J. Bowman wrote:

> Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> 
>> My inclination is to clarify "any response to it" so that a cache can
>> use the same cached response to serve multiple requests with no-store
>> in them (or not). 
>> 
> 
> That doesn't make sense to me.  My understanding is that no-store has
> the RFC 2068 meaning of no-cache, which allows the RFC 2616 meaning of
> no-cache to be synonymous with must-revalidate while allowing specific
> headers to be excluded.  Your suggestion for no-store would result in
> the RFC 2068 semantics of no-cache being discontinued, as there would
> be no way to prevent the response being written to nonvolatile storage,
> a need which isn't met by the private directive (which allows user-
> agents to store).
> 
> -Eric
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 18 October 2010 00:19:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:29 GMT