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

Re: Message length and caches

From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 00:26:16 +1300
Message-ID: <50B351D8.50702@treenet.co.nz>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 26/11/2012 11:23 p.m., Roberto Peon wrote:
> I was understanding that Willy was suggesting that we potentially add 
> a recommendation (or stronger) about what an intermediary should do 
> when it has a response which is framed by connection close.
> Specifically, if a response is framed by connection close, then, treat 
> the response as if it was uncacheable and attempt to convey to the 
> client that the originator of the response framed with connection close.
> That indication could be accomplished by also framing with connection: 
> close, or it could take the form (if we extend the spec) of a new 
> header of some kind.

A header is kind of a non-starter unless it is a trailer or chunk 
indicator of some kind. Abortions can happen on responses too large to 
buffer - very likely to in fact.

Amos
Received on Monday, 26 November 2012 11:26:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 26 November 2012 11:26:56 GMT