Re: CORS and 304

I don't think it is. I think the Access-Control-Max-Age issue is
separate from the one that started this thread.

/ Jonas

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> Aha!
>
> Why is a 304 being returned for OPTIONS?
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> On 5 Dec 2013, at 10:36 am, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Hill, Brad <bhill@paypal.com> wrote:
>>> We still have the case where the headers indicating validity to the cache may give a longer lifetime than a supplied Access-Control-Max-Age.  In such cases, I would argue that regenerating the Access-Control headers is part of providing correct caching and validity information to the client, and therefore they SHOULD be included with a 304.
>>
>> Access-Control-Max-Age only applies to OPTIONS responses which I
>> didn't think could ever be cached?
>>
>> / Jonas
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2013 23:53:23 UTC