- From: Scott Lawrence <lawrence@agranat.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 12:08:53 -0500 (EST)
- To: Mike_Spreitzer.PARC@xerox.com
- Cc: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
On Wed, 25 Feb 1998 Mike_Spreitzer.PARC@xerox.com wrote: > Let me illustrate my question by asking for an analysis of the following > situation. Consider a rendering server whose job is to accept GET requests for > arbitrary URIs and always respond with entities whose MIME type is some > compressed bitmap type suitable for quick blasting onto a TV screen. When > asked to GET a URI, this server acts as a client to GET both the requested URI > and any inlined images, then renders them all together to create the compressed > bitmap response. This is a non-chain shape: a request into a server causes > multiple requests to go out of that server. Among the questions I wonder about > are: (1) is it fair to say this server is an "HTTP/1.1 server"? It certainly could be. > (2) is this server an "HTTP/1.1 proxy"? No. It is originating the response - I suppose that one could characterize this as an HTTP-to-HTTP (H2H) gateway if the sources of the composite image were obtained using HTTP, but that is essentially irrelevant - no other server has the response that is being sent to the user agent, so it is not acting as a proxy for another server. > (3) what happens with the Last-Modified headers in the responses? If I were creating such a thing, I would set the cache validators (both L-M and Etag) such that they reflected the state of the composite; L-M to the most recent L-M of the components, and the Etag some composite of the Etag values for the components.
Received on Wednesday, 25 February 1998 09:10:32 UTC