Re: Push and Caching
Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Tue, 19 August 2014 17:28 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02A641A06A1 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:28:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.67
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.67 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N8mtpV1Ihh2M for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5D571A0667 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1XJnAa-0004kH-LR for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 17:26:04 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 17:26:04 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1XJnAa-0004kH-LR@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1XJnAK-0004a8-JC for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 17:25:48 +0000
Received: from mail-we0-f177.google.com ([74.125.82.177]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1XJnAJ-00081X-Aq for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 17:25:48 +0000
Received: by mail-we0-f177.google.com with SMTP id w62so6779792wes.22 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:25:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=q6mrfaTlJ52sgL6Rz3s0lIe+T23Z7HkJwu+lOxX/JQ8=; b=EyRTopgycEeIWhaE4n7P33rH1ybTq++cyRmQEq9M/p7Vem0LkZa0xuA8G5TWcGCcD6 7gP8uSc5SgKrO03HXKKcj2P2TUJk9Cz635cbb2va9BLhJHonmJZswy4uob9YZubhuTBw rhUBjOpIDpoACd0hjTt1RgiBWuww1w4KqUMs9aPm3NhdZ5gVKConkKADbWKGYAgtZDyB XFmkd8q8k518O/YTb6BNDFFvE78ol8WrYEKOoVpTlFB9j3hW2BhWVCIUGNiWp2xTYU9Z 0mxIGH7oBDgTiw6HJ23jOF/oSpeu6iLYXyDbKHlDNQGEvlHPio72visZ1GcIYjSBnZoI cGmw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.90.11 with SMTP id bs11mr8474348wib.47.1408469120753; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:25:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.6.229 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:25:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <dc3d860ecb4b4d408a5ed0519a036e61@BL2PR03MB132.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <dc3d860ecb4b4d408a5ed0519a036e61@BL2PR03MB132.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:25:20 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWvKgyDcm-1jEKZUA2Qza9M46X+X_QybwuqRwvSUrTjNw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=74.125.82.177; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-we0-f177.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.743, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1XJnAJ-00081X-Aq e66c0957043e70a2ba0a9e5f0a966d18
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Push and Caching
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnWvKgyDcm-1jEKZUA2Qza9M46X+X_QybwuqRwvSUrTjNw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/26658
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
On 19 August 2014 08:21, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com> wrote: > I missed when that change happened. Can someone with better git-fu remind > me? Was there list discussion? https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/commit/3cec55e8 The change title: untangle relationship between pushing, promising, and caching - A server can only push responses that are cacheable (see <xref target="HTTP-p6" x:fmt="," - x:rel="#response.cacheability"/>); promised requests MUST be safe (see <xref - target="HTTP-p2" x:fmt="," x:rel="#safe.methods"/>) and MUST NOT include a request body. + A server can only push requests that are safe (see <xref target="HTTP-p2" x:fmt=","^M + x:rel="#safe.methods"/>), cacheable (see <xref target="HTTP-p6" x:fmt=","^M + x:rel="#response.cacheability"/>) and do not include a request body.^M This was part of what was intended to be an editorial fix, along with a large bunch of other edits (https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/commits/master?page=18) and I missed the subtle, but substantive change in the midst of the rest. I think that the `Cache-Control: nocache` response is a useful feature. I do remember being careful to permit uncacheable responses, knowing that this would be an important use case. I want to be able to use push to trivially replace long-polling and this would help with that. Maybe Mark can defend his change.
- Push and Caching Mike Bishop
- Re: Push and Caching Mark Nottingham
- Re: Push and Caching Martin Thomson
- Re: Push and Caching Greg Wilkins
- Re: Push and Caching Martin Thomson
- RE: Push and Caching William Chow
- RE: Push and Caching Mike Bishop
- Re: Push and Caching Patrick McManus
- Re: Push and Caching Mark Nottingham
- Re: Push and Caching Martin Thomson
- RE: Push and Caching Mike Bishop
- Re: Push and Caching Martin Thomson
- RE: Push and Caching Mike Bishop
- Re: Push and Caching Mark Nottingham
- Re: Push and Caching Greg Wilkins
- Re: Push and Caching Mark Nottingham
- Re: Push and Caching Mark Nottingham
- Re: Push and Caching Martin Thomson
- Re: Push and Caching Mark Nottingham
- Re: Push and Caching Martin Thomson
- Re: Push and Caching Mark Nottingham
- Re: Push and Caching Greg Wilkins
- RE: Push and Caching William Chow
- Re: Push and Caching Mark Nottingham
- RE: Push and Caching William Chow
- Re: Push and Caching Matthew Kerwin
- Re: Push and Caching Mark Nottingham
- Re: Push and Caching Chris Drechsler
- Re: Push and Caching Roy T. Fielding
- Re: Push and Caching Roy T. Fielding
- Re: Push and Caching Martin Thomson
- Re: Push and Caching Roy T. Fielding
- Re: Push and Caching Michael Sweet
- RE: Push and Caching William Chow
- Re: Push and Caching Martin Thomson
- Re: Push and Caching Martin Thomson
- Re: Push and Caching Roy T. Fielding
- RE: Push and Caching William Chow
- Re: Push and Caching Greg Wilkins
- Re: Push and Caching Greg Wilkins
- Re: Push and Caching Martin Thomson
- Re: Push and Caching Greg Wilkins