W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 09:28:42 +1000
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Message-Id: <9523B091-FD0E-4C59-AE74-1A45B7E3CCB9@mnot.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

On 05/07/2012, at 12:17 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> On 2012-07-03 04:38, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> I haven't heard any more discussion of this. As it is, we have a proposal to close this issue:
>> 
>>> Add a note to <https://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/httpbis/draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p6-cache.html#calculating.freshness.lifetime>:
>>> 
>>> """
>>> When there is more than one value present for a given directive (e.g., two Expires headers, multiple Cache-Control: max-age directives), it is considered invalid. Caches SHOULD consider responses that have invalid freshness information to be stale.
>>> """
>> 
>> Feedback?
>> ...
> 
> Sounds good to me. Proposed patch: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/attachment/ticket/353/353.diff>


Thinking about this a bit more, I'm somewhat uncomfortable about making it a requirement, especially considering the discussion that followed. Given that, how about:

"""
When there is more than one value present for a given directive (e.g., two Expires headers, multiple Cache-Control: max-age directives), it is considered invalid. Caches are encouraged to consider responses that have invalid freshness information to be stale.
"""


--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 4 July 2012 23:29:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 4 July 2012 23:29:17 GMT