- From: Dirk.vanGulik <Dirk.vanGulik@jrc.it>
- Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 21:01:32 +0200
- To: sjk@amazon.com
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> Suppose that a POST returns the same resource that a later GET > *could* return. The POST's returned resource gets cached, even though the POST This certainly happens on quite a few servers (including ewse.jrc.it) where you have forms which either reveal themselves; or act as a 'post' to themselves. Seen this quite a few times on other servers as well. Either for code management/development reasons; or because of referals from other scripts; it allows you to have central data entry pages. > itself could not have been served from a cache. The POST's response can > legitimately contain state-info. So, there is no correlation between > responses that can contain state-info and those that can be cached. > Leave cacheability to the already too numerous headers that control that. Yes exactly. We had to deny access to quite a few chaches on the site because they just did that. > There may not be a *need* for it that we can imagine right now, but > there's also no need for restrictions against it. An origin server > may legitimately and aggressively try to start sessions whenever it can, > including times when it is delivering cacheable, shared resources. Yes; but it would be better, imho, to design things decently from scratch and distinish between *what* is to be chached in its context. If you look at our experimental ewse.jrc.it server you might see that the pages seen also depend on the user who sees them. So I might see a different layout to the shopping mall than you do; even though we use the same url. This is something which, although ill defined, is happening at quite a few places with configurable shopping bags and god knows what. And I personnaly, as a server admin, would hate to block chaching completely. Dw.
Received on Monday, 28 August 1995 12:05:04 UTC