- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 21:44:47 +0200
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
- CC: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2012-07-12 20:38, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > ... > No, because it isn't true in practice (nor desired). We actually > do want an etag to override last-modified even when IMS is false. > ... So that use case is a request with both "If-None-Match" and "If-Modified-Since", where the Etag condition is true, but the timestamp condition is not? Does this happen frequently in practice? What's the reason for sending both header fields when the ETag is available? (Trying to understand...) Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2012 19:45:23 UTC