Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?

In a request?

On 18/10/2010, at 11:17 AM, Eric J. Bowman wrote:

> Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> My inclination is to clarify "any response to it" so that a cache can
>> use the same cached response to serve multiple requests with no-store
>> in them (or not). 
> That doesn't make sense to me.  My understanding is that no-store has
> the RFC 2068 meaning of no-cache, which allows the RFC 2616 meaning of
> no-cache to be synonymous with must-revalidate while allowing specific
> headers to be excluded.  Your suggestion for no-store would result in
> the RFC 2068 semantics of no-cache being discontinued, as there would
> be no way to prevent the response being written to nonvolatile storage,
> a need which isn't met by the private directive (which allows user-
> agents to store).
> -Eric

Mark Nottingham

Received on Monday, 18 October 2010 00:19:39 UTC