- From: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 11:48:26 +0100
- To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
Jeffrey Mogul wrote: > I'm not sure that the HTTP/1.1 specification needs to say much more > about this ... but since it apparently was not sufficiently clear > to at least some readers, I'll propose an editorial change. > I propose adding this to the end of section 13.9: > > Note that some HTTP/1.0 cache operators have found that it is > dangerous to cache responses to requests for URLs including the > string "cgi-bin". HTTP/1.1 caches should follow this practice > for responses that do not include an explicit expiration time. > HTTP/1.1 origin servers that want to allow caching of responses > for URLs including "?" or "cgi-bin" SHOULD include an explicit > expiration time. Explicit expiration times may be specified > using Expires, or the max-age directive of Cache-Control, or > both. I think CERN server is usually configured with "htbin" as CGI directory. There are still a lot of them around. And people who switched from CERN to something else probably kept htbin directory because all existing pages pointed to it. I'm a bit confused with the proposed addition. I thought Cache-Control: public would be enough, but that's not explicitly stated. -- .-. .-. Life is a sexually transmitted disease. (_ \ / _) | dave@srce.hr | dave@fly.cc.fer.hr
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 1997 04:06:17 UTC