- From: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 97 14:55:56 MDT
- To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
Drazen Kacar <dave@public.srce.hr> writes:
I'm a bit confused with the proposed addition. I thought
Cache-Control: public
would be enough, but that's not explicitly stated.
The "public" directive was intended for a different purpose. From
RFC2068:
public
Indicates that the response is cachable by any cache, even if it
would normally be non-cachable or cachable only within a
non-shared cache. (See also Authorization, section 14.8, for
additional details.)
While simply adding "Cache-control: public" to a response does
imply that it is cachable, this doesn't say enough. I.e., how
long is the response "fresh"? It seems more useful, in general,
to use
Cache-control: max-age=3600
(or whatever), since this also implies cachability, but it also
gives more explicit information to the cache.
-Jeff
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 1997 15:07:02 UTC