W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webappsec@w3.org > December 2013

Re: CORS and 304

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 15:36:00 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+c2ei8=WXL1=36tC_raLffb=jdcqYRGK4Aje1HZBToZ2-uVqQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Hill, Brad" <bhill@paypal.com>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Odin HÝrthe Omdal <odinho@opera.com>, WebAppSec WG <public-webappsec@w3.org>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Hill, Brad <bhill@paypal.com> wrote:
> We still have the case where the headers indicating validity to the cache may give a longer lifetime than a supplied Access-Control-Max-Age.  In such cases, I would argue that regenerating the Access-Control headers is part of providing correct caching and validity information to the client, and therefore they SHOULD be included with a 304.

Access-Control-Max-Age only applies to OPTIONS responses which I
didn't think could ever be cached?

/ Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2013 23:36:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:54:03 UTC