- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 12:05:11 +0000
- To: "Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com>
- cc: "Amos Jeffries" <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In message <em94119d23-43b0-4de4-a3e3-8c30e8a40bfc@bombed>, "Adrien W. de Croy" writes: >>>for instance a cache receiving a request with If-Modified-Since later >>>than its own Last-Modified, may presume the client has a later copy,=20 >>>and >>>discard its own copy. >> >>Uhm, so you're saying I can clean the entire cache with bogos IMS >>requests ? > >that's not the point. It very much is: A cache would have to be stupid to make that assumption, and we should not be protecting stupid mistakes with the specification, we should make things work. No matter what you write in the specification, you will have IMS headers with non-server-supplied timestamps, because it is possible and there are legitimate use-cases. We can discuss if the text expresses this optimally, but there is no way the text can put this particular genie back in his bottle. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Monday, 18 March 2013 12:05:38 UTC