- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:27:36 +1100
- To: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
- Cc: Brad Porter <bwporter@yahoo.com>, "WAF WG (public)" <public-appformats@w3.org>
If the 4xx were cacheable, it would be served from cache; if not, it would go back. Either way, the right thing happens (as long as all of the headers that affect the response are listed in Vary). On 13/01/2008, at 5:47 AM, Thomas Roessler wrote: > On 2008-01-11 17:15:03 +1100, Mark Nottingham wrote: > >> That's the beauty of the server-side model; it works very well with >> caching. >> >> E.g., if the request is >> >> GET /foo HTTP/1.1 >> Host: www.example.com >> Referer-Root: http://other.example.org/ >> >> The response could be >> >> HTTP/1.1 200 OK >> Cache-Control: max-age=3600 >> Vary: Referer-Root >> >> ... >> >> which tells a cache that it can serve that response to other >> clients, *as long as* they send the same Referer-Root header. The >> cache ends up enforcing the server's policy on its behalf, >> without any new software. > > If a 4xx response was seen before, the request would still go back > to the original server, right? > > Thanks, > -- > Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org> -- Mark Nottingham mnot@yahoo-inc.com
Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 00:27:58 UTC