W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2016

RE: Call for Adoption -- Cache-Control: immutable

From: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 04:55:45 +0000
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
CC: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>
Message-ID: <BN6PR03MB270805B93CD50D7BF7F7D50A87840@BN6PR03MB2708.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
I'm generally favorable toward this idea, but will note one open question in my mind:  This seems to be very tightly tied to the scenario of hitting refresh on a page whose content frequently changes but whose dependent resources don't.  Putting "immutable" on those dependent resources helps reduce the server load and time taken when the user hits refresh, either in their own local cache or in proxies that are on path to the site.

There seems to be a parallel discussion (see https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1vwx8WiUASKyC2I-2Dj2smNhaJaQQhcWREh7PC3HiIAQCo_edit&d=DgMFAg&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=1l7nWo9Y5pZ_Fce4oaurZQ&m=AlkS3R79U-PYonxL1dpzJx-7U842dQ1ecXQodjpgPSo&s=IRSkaXwsZPN79a5lIo4n-SJrwvSNDe2QQF3XichUZXo&e= for Chrome's) about softening the behavior of the refresh button to avoid force-refreshing all dependencies, which would likely have the same results.  Can someone point me to a scenario in which both are worth doing, or is this really a pair of mutually-sufficient solutions to the same problem?

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mnot@mnot.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2016 8:04 PM
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Cc: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>
Subject: Call for Adoption -- Cache-Control: immutable

As discussed in Seoul, there seems to be strong interest in adopting Patrick's draft:
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mcmanus-immutable

Please indicate any concerns on-list; statements of support would also be helpful.

Regards,

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Thursday, 8 December 2016 04:56:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 8 December 2016 04:56:26 UTC