Re: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-cache-header-00.txt

[Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]>]

Hi Thomas,

Thanks.

My initial thought is that HIT_STALE covers the case you describe (which sounds a lot like RFC5861 stale-while-revalidate).

I could see adding a parameter that indicates that the cache intends to update the entry asynchronously in the near future; would that work?

Cheers,


> On 8 Sep 2018, at 1:26 am, Thomas Peterson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> I'm very much in favour of this, thanks Mark.
> 
> However, the draft doesn't expose a cache-action where a previous request is causing an update in still progress and is serving stale (for example, this is defined in nginx's UPDATING state). I think this should be added, perhaps as "HIT_REFRESH_UPDATING".
> 
> Also, no server I've found exposes a value that aligns with "ERROR", how might a 502/504 response code correlate to this, and should this draft specify these response codes be used as a 200 OK along with cache-action of "ERROR" doesn't make sense to me.
> 
> Regards
> 
> 
> 
> From: Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]>
> Date: Friday, 7 September 2018 at 07:48
> To: HTTP Working Group <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-cache-header-00.txt
> Resent-From: <[e-mail]>
> Resent-Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2018 06:45:18 +0000
> 
> FYI; IMO it's past time to standardise x-cache and have a real spec for it. 
> 
> This is a straw-man, based on a bit of research on existing implementations.
> 
> Pretty version at:
>   https://mnot.github.io/I-D/cache-header/
> 
> Comments? I think the primary audience here is proxy cache and CDN vendors, and their users.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: mailto:[e-mail]
> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-cache-header-00.txt
> Date: 7 September 2018 at 4:41:52 pm AEST
> To: "Mark Nottingham" <mailto:[e-mail]>
> 
> 
> A new version of I-D, draft-nottingham-cache-header-00.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Mark Nottingham and posted to the
> IETF repository.
> 
> Name:		draft-nottingham-cache-header
> Revision:	00
> Title:		The Cache HTTP Response Header
> Document date:	2018-09-07
> Group:		Individual Submission
> Pages:		7
> URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nottingham-cache-header-00.txt
> Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nottingham-cache-header/
> Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-cache-header-00
> Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-nottingham-cache-header
> 
> 
> Abstract:
>   To aid debugging, HTTP caches often append headers to a response
>   detailing how they handled the request.  This specification codifies
>   that practice and updates it for HTTP's current caching model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at http://tools.ietf.org.
> 
> The IETF Secretariat
> 
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
> 
> 
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/