Re: [apps-discuss] Review of draft-ietf-alto-protocol-11.txt

[Ted Hardie <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Ben Niven-Jenkins
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> Ted,

> I do not believe that this is the case, from Section 6.5 of draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-19 (RFC2616 has similar text to the first paragraph):
>
>   Responses to POST requests are only cacheable when they include
>   explicit freshness information (see Section 2.3.1 of [Part6]).  A
>   cached POST response with a Content-Location header field (see
>   Section 6.7 of [Part3]) whose value is the effective Request URI MAY
>   be used to satisfy subsequent GET and HEAD requests.
>
>   Note that POST caching is not widely implemented.  However, the 303
>   (See Other) response can be used to direct the user agent to retrieve
>   a cacheable resource.
>
> Ben

It is not the cacheability of the results of post request that I was
referring to, but
the cacheability of the results of a 303.  See 10.3.4 of RFC 2616:

The 303 response MUST NOT be cached, but the response to the second
(redirected) request might be cacheable.

regards,

Ted Hardie