- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 19:08:38 +0200
- To: Roland Zink <roland@zinks.de>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 2014-06-17 13:42, Roland Zink wrote: > So the range request is really for representation A and return some > representation C, e.g. gzip content which is most likely different from > representation B. My question is now what Etags (if there are etags) are > send in the requests (when conditional) and responses. When the client > sends the range request then will it send the etag for B? It's asking for a range of B, to be generated from A. So I think it ought to use ETags applying to B. But of course that's something to properly write down. > A cache then can build A with the ETAG of B using several bbcc range > requests from a client. If it gets normal byte range requests for B then > it can't use it (cache has only A and C) and need to forward the request > to the origin server. If the cache has B and gets a bbcc range request > then it can respond from the cache by decompressing to A, select the > requested range and return the compressed content. If the cache has B > and gets a normal byte range request for A then it could do the same but > will not match as it doesn't know about the Etag for A. Seems like more > effort for caches, but maybe still an acceptable price. Optimal behavior of intermediaries is an interesting topic, but I don't see intermediaries implementing this anyway. The idea was to enable clients to do something they can't do now. > When the client should the send the range request with the etag for A > then how does the client get the etag for A? > ... HEAD? Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2014 17:09:08 UTC