W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: Negotiated private cache storage allocation

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:51:53 +1100
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, REST-Discuss Discussion Group <rest-discuss@yahoogroups.com>
Message-Id: <2D866320-A3D2-437C-96F8-AAC83B989CB7@mnot.net>
To: Mike Kelly <mikekelly321@gmail.com>
I'm a little uncomfortable calling this "negotiation"; the model I have in mind is that a site might request a larger allocation than the default, and the UA would ask the user (or possibly, the user would pre-configure to accept or deny). Wherever possible, though, the browser should probably use a heuristic, to keep it simple (From a UX perspective).

Cheers,


On 15/12/2011, at 9:38 AM, Mike Kelly wrote:

> Nice one thanks Mark, +1 to all of that post
> 
> What do you think about handling the negotiation via HTTP?
> 
> Cheers,
> Mike
> 
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>> Some thoughts along vaguely similar lines -
>> 
>> http://www.mnot.net/blog/2011/08/28/better_browser_caching
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> 
>> On 15/12/2011, at 7:16 AM, Mike Kelly wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Is anyone aware of any proposals that extend HTTP to allow servers and
>>> clients to negotiate client-side storage allocation for client-side
>>> (private) caches?
>>> 
>>> Basically, I'm looking for a way for a server to indicate how much
>>> storage should be allocated for caching responses from a particular
>>> domain name, and possibly also for the client to be able to indicate
>>> how much allocation was actually possible.
>>> 
>>> Aside from that, if you have any thoughts on whether or not this is
>>> really feasible or is just a plain bad idea - please let me know
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mike
>>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Mark Nottingham
>> http://www.mnot.net/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 

--
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2011 22:54:40 GMT

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