- From: Simon Spero <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 16:23:18 -0800 (PST)
- To: Lou Montulli <montulli@mozilla.com>
- Cc: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>, ietf-lists@proper.com, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
On Mon, 13 Nov 1995, Lou Montulli wrote: > Simon Spero wrote: > > We don't need a hack here. Using a 205 response to signify a > partial document is being returned seems far better than > the "no-cache" nonsense. The 205 response is also necessary > for the client to tell the difference between a full document > and a partial document response. Lou- the 205 response is not part of http/1.0 as described, and this can lead to some caching confusion; if a 1.1 client is talking through a 1.0 proxy to a 1.1 client, and a partial fetch is done, it's possible to the 1.0 proxy to keep a copy of the partial contents, yet not be aware that the contents are bogus- the next client to do a fetch could end up with partial data, yet not be aware of it. Simon
Received on Monday, 13 November 1995 16:25:19 UTC