- From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2020 13:27:53 +1200
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 14/06/20 1:32 am, Ken Murchison wrote: > All, > > I'm trying to verify my understanding of must-revalidate vs unqualified > no-cache in responses per the text in Sections 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.2.3 > respectively. Other than the point regarding the Authorization header > field and must-revalidate, is the difference that unqualified no-cache > requires validation for every request and must-revalidate only requires > validation after the response has become stale? > The specification difference is exactly that yes. In practice implementations (particularly older RFC2616 based ones) may treat "no-cache" as if it were "no-store" and "must-revalidate" as if it were unqualified "no-cache". Amos
Received on Sunday, 14 June 2020 01:38:28 UTC