- From: MOKHTAR Ahmed CNET/DSM/REN <ahmed.mokhtar@cnet.francetelecom.fr>
- Date: Thu, 30 Apr 1998 08:23:50 +0200
- To: "'http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com'" <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com>
> ---------- > De : MOKHTAR Ahmed CNET/DSM/REN > Date : jeudi 30 avril 1998 08:22 > A : 'Jeffrey Mogul' > Objet : RE: question in caching in the HTTP1.1 > > I didn't understand clearly what is the relation between transparency and > the error on the age calculation. > about the synch. between caches, may be the SCSP solves the problem at > some time in the future. > and talking about the transparency, what do you think about CARP > effeciency in that matter. I mean don't you think that CARP violate the > transparency. > > Ahmed > > ---------- > De : Jeffrey Mogul[SMTP:mogul@pa.dec.com] > Date : jeudi 23 avril 1998 21:36 > A : MOKHTAR Ahmed CNET/DSM/REN > Cc : 'http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com' > Objet : Re: question in caching in the HTTP1.1 > > MOKHTAR Ahmed CNET/DSM/REN <ahmed.mokhtar@cnet.francetelecom.fr> writes: > my question concern caching in http 1.1 about the expiration model > rfc 2068 page 53 you get the corrected_initial_age by adding > corrected_received_age to a new term which is (now-request_time) I > think this will give some misleading results because now-request > time is equal to the transaction period. > > First of all, you should refer to draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-rev-03, > not RFC2068, for any discussion of the text of the HTTP/1.1 > specification. > > In any case, the goal of this Age calculation is to support the > "transparency" requirements for caching, described at the beginning > of Section 13 of the specification. In particular, we have > > A basic principle is that it must be possible for the clients to > detect any potential relaxation of semantic transparency. > > The goal of the age calculation is to discover whether a response > is fresh. In order to meet this principle, we need to err on the > side of caution; that is, we would rather treat a fresh response > as stale (and needed revalidation) than treating a stale response > as fresh (thereby presenting a user with out-of-date information). > > Given that there is no way to calculate the precise age of a > response in a distributed system with (possibly) unsynchronized > clocks, the Age calculation described in the HTTP/1.1 specification > is designed to overestimate the Age, rather than to underestimate > it. This preserves the property that clients can detect potentially > stale responses; it may cause a few unnecessary reloads, but generally > if the remaining freshness lifetime of a response is so close to > the error in the Age calculation that it causes an unnecessary > reload, then probably we are dealing with a response whose original > freshness lifetime is short ... this means that someone really wants > to avoid a stale response in this case. > > -Jeff > >
Received on Wednesday, 29 April 1998 23:37:30 UTC