W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2017


From: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 20:35:19 +0200 (EET)
To: HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
CC: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
Message-Id: <20170206183520.28A791F065@welho-filter3.welho.com>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-encryption/
> This incorporates my best attempt to address the comments Kari had on
> the last version. 

Looks ok.

| Allowing clients to cache the http-opportunistic resource means that	
| all alternative services need to be able to respond to requests for	
| "http" resources.  A client is permitted to use an alternative	
| service without acquiring the http-opportunistic resource from that	
| service.

This may also imply that, if server does not allow caching 
http-opportunistic  resource, client need acquiring the 
http-opportunistic resource from chosen alternative service 
before using it. If server does that kind conclusion, this 
looks still ok. ( That was my question about cache-control 
= no-store. ) 

/ Kari Hurtta
Received on Monday, 6 February 2017 18:35:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 6 February 2017 18:36:02 UTC