Re: draft-reschke-http-cice vs discussions in Toronto @ IETF 90: use as response header field

On 2015-02-02 07:39, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> Hi there,
>> the minutes (<>) say:
>>> MarK: Different meaning in the request vs. response, makes him twitchy
>> Mark, could you elaborate on that a bit? Do you believe that changing something which currently is a request header field only to be used as response header field as well to be a problem in general? Why?
> Experience with Cache-Control -- people get confused over what the pertinent directives are in each direction, and misuse it as a result.
> Cheers,

Well, we've got many other header fields where the experience seems to 
be exactly the opposite, say Content-Type or Content-Encoding. Thus I'm 
not yet convinced this is an issue...

Best regards, Julian

Received on Monday, 2 February 2015 07:58:14 UTC