- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 14:46:25 -0700
- To: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Cc: http-caching@pa.dec.com
> The difference between "max-age=0" and "must-revalidate" for caches > that play by the transparency rules is that, if revalidation fails > because of network failure: > > - with "max-age=0", you return a stale 200 (OK) response with a > warning header attached > > - with "must-revalidate", you return a 5xx error response > > So must-revalidate is more than just "really really max-age=0". > > Speaking in road-sign metaphors, "max-age=0" means "speed limit 50 > Km/h", while "must-revalidate" means "WARNING: sharp turn: safe > maximal speed 50 Km/h". If you ignore the first, you only sin against > community standards. If you ignore the second, you end up upside down > besides the road. That is a better description and justification -- it should be included in the specification. I can live with must-revalidate if it implies derailment. .....Roy
Received on Thursday, 11 April 1996 22:21:51 UTC