W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > September to December 1996

Re: caching CGI responses

From: <jg@zorch.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 96 15:36:37 -0500
Message-Id: <9612052036.AA00964@zorch.w3.org>
To: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
Cc: advax@triumf.ca, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/2036
I have talked with Louis Monier (and I think I mentioned
this to Mike Burrows as well) about doing stuff for marking
CGI responses cachable in AltaVista.  I told them that
it didn't make any real difference to do it before 1.1 clients
and proxies were available, which hasn't quite happened yet.
(And they have had more than enough things to do in the first
place that asking them to do so before it would actually help anyone 
seemed pointless.). So Louis at least has it on his list of things to 
do for A.V. in finite time (unless he has forgotten).

I'll poke at them again next week if I can.

BTW, we should have interesting HTTP/1.1 performance data available
by next week (the IETF meeting); we're scrambling here to take
the data now we have implementations we actually think work correctly
that do pipelining (not just persistent connections, which we've
had running for a long time).  When the write up is done, we'll
post a note to the working group (with luck, you might see it
over the weekend).

Preliminary results look very nice :-).  Saves lots of packets,
and runs faster.  :-).  But then again, that's what we expected....
			- Jim Gettys
Received on Thursday, 5 December 1996 12:51:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:16:21 UTC