W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 1997

Re: ISSUE VARY: Proposed wording

From: Maurizio Codogno <mau@beatles.cselt.it>
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 17:49:13 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199707071549.RAA07641@beatles.cselt.it>
To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/3673
Henrik proposes:

HTTP/1.1 origin servers MUST include a Vary header field (see section
14.43) in any cachable response based on server-driven negotiation and
SHOULD include a Vary header field with a non-cachable response based on
server-driven negotiation.

While I agree that no harm is done if an origin server sends a Vary header
field with a non-cachable response, I cannot understand why a stronger
requirement (ie, a SHOULD) is asked.

I think it means that such a header could be useful in some way, but
since the resource cannot be cached a negotiation has to be done anyway.
Even section 14.43 of RFC2068 does not tell me much. Could anybody
enlighten me, please?

ciao, .mau.
Received on Monday, 7 July 1997 08:53:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:43:02 UTC