- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 18:18:58 +0200
- To: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
On 2016-07-28 18:07, Alex Rousskov wrote: > On 07/28/2016 01:00 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> On 2016-07-28 01:26, Alex Rousskov wrote: >>> On 07/27/2016 03:37 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: >>>> On 2016-07-27 22:56, Adrien de Croy wrote: >>>>> maybe need something like >>>>> >>>>> Vary: Request-Body >>> >>> >>>> I'd say this is implied anyway. >>> >>> >>> RFC 7231 appears to imply the opposite: It explicitly allows GET >>> requests with bodies while not placing any request-body-related >>> restrictions on their response cachability and sharing AFAICT. > >> I don't see how this means that you could ignore the body should you >> decide to cache it. > > What is not prohibited is allowed. If caching a GET response while > paying no attention to the GET request body is not prohibited, then it > is allowed. If it is allowed, then "Vary: Request-Body" is not implied > in the GET transaction context. Then I'd say we should open a bug for RFC 7234bis. > ... Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2016 16:19:45 UTC