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

Re: Our old friends, weak ETags

From: Adrien W. de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 05:22:41 +0000
To: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org, bruce@perens.com
Message-Id: <emed4814e0-e47b-4a9f-9089-ddbf4c072de4@bombed>
Hi Bruce, thanks for your answer.. but is this _weak_ ETags or just 
ETags in general?

Regards

Adrien

------ Original Message ------
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Hi Adrien,
>
>I use ETag because of an insufficiency in RFC 2616 dates: their
>resolution is one second. Updates to entities at sub-second intervals
>are possible and would result in entities with the same Last-Modified
>date. To be pedantically resolution-independent, I convert the date/time
>to a string representation of a ratio. It's presently the number of
>nanoseconds since the epoch. I encode that and an entity serial number
>in the ETag.
>
>If HTTP dates are extended to have sub-second resolution, I will
>probably be able to do without ETags.
>
>    Thanks
>
>    Bruce
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 20 July 2012 05:25:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 20 July 2012 05:25:32 GMT