- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 11:39:44 +1000
- To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Cc: art@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hi Martin, I've addressed all of these in the latest commits on: https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/commits/main/draft-ietf-httpbis-cache-header.md ... except for: > Thanks! In terms of content, that's a great example (three layers, detailed explanations). But we suddenly have three header fields rather than just one. If I understand correctly, that example could also be written > > Cache-Status: ReverseProxyCache; hit, > ForwardProxyCache; fwd=uri-miss; collapsed; stored, > BrowserCache; fwd=uri-miss > > As far as I remember, there isn't any text that discusses trade-offs or recommends one or the other or says they are equivalent. But maybe I missed something? That's because this is the case for all HTTP headers, not just this one. I'm extremely reluctant to re-specify or explain how HTTP works in any great detail in this specification. Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 18 August 2021 01:40:09 UTC