Re: relative weights of different Accept-* headers in content negotiation

Brian Smith wrote:
>
>> So it's a shared cache scenario.  It can't be legal to send gzipped
>> content to a UA that didn't advertise support for it, so the proxy
>> therefore must consider Accept-* headers.
>>     
>
> Caches do not need to interpret Accept-* headers; that is why Accept-*
> headers are not mentioned at all in Part 6 (except for obscure case of
> determining the language to use for messages in Warning headers).
>   
OK.  That seems counter-intuitive, so it could be worth putting an 
explanatory note to that effect in Part 6 somewhere.

Thanks

Adrien

> See the definitions of the Accept-* headers. For example, "If no
> Accept-Encoding field is present in a request, the server MAY assume that
> the client will accept any content coding." There are actually a lot of
> rules for determining what the server SHOULD do. But, there are no MUST-
> level requirements for how servers interpret Accept-* headers.
>
> Regards,
> Brian
>
>   

-- 
Adrien de Croy - WinGate Proxy Server - http://www.wingate.com