- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 14:37:31 +1100
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/402> On 19/11/2012, at 7:33 AM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote: >>> 2) In the definitions of If-Match and If-None-Match, we don't specify whether >> the weak or strong comparison function is to be used when these validations >> actually occur, although we spend a lot of text on when to use weak vs. strong >> ETags themselves. >>> >>> Now, you might say that an origin server can decide whether to use the weak >> or strong function, but an intermediary or client cache doesn't have license to do >> weak comparison, and could cause a lot of trouble if it did. AFAICT we don't >> specify this, but I think we should. > > The weak ETag response *is* the license. >> >> I propose we specify that proxy and client caches MUST use the strong >> comparison function with If-Match and If-None-Match. > > Why gut the intent of weak ETags? OK, makes sense. Any issue with documenting them as using the weak comparison function? Regards, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2012 03:37:58 UTC