IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: ID for Immutable

Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org> Fri, 28 October 2016 14:49 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@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 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F34D2129B17 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 07:49:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.352
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.352 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 wWlEA8uvycgl for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 07:49:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 507A8129B12 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 07:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1c08On-0004kB-Ao for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:44:49 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:44:49 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1c08On-0004kB-Ao@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <khurtta@welho.com>) id 1c08Og-0004j0-8b for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:44:42 +0000
Received: from welho-filter4.welho.com ([83.102.41.26]) by titan.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <khurtta@welho.com>) id 1c08Oa-0000bk-0u for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:44:36 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by welho-filter4.welho.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48EFF162D1; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:44:07 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at pp.htv.fi
Received: from welho-smtp2.welho.com ([IPv6:::ffff:83.102.41.85]) by localhost (welho-filter4.welho.com [::ffff:83.102.41.26]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pugFiRt48tat; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:44:05 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from hurtta09lk.keh.iki.fi (89-27-35-245.bb.dnainternet.fi [89.27.35.245]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by welho-smtp2.welho.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6F3221C; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:44:05 +0300 (EEST)
In-Reply-To: <CAOdDvNqam930_0eA1p3yHW+xDdOm0AAMKvVKe6xwNwm1itpRpQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOdDvNqam930_0eA1p3yHW+xDdOm0AAMKvVKe6xwNwm1itpRpQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:44:05 +0300
Sender: hurtta@hurtta09lk.keh.iki.fi
From: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
CC: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
X-Mailer: ELM [version ME+ 2.5 PLalpha43+]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-Id: <20161028144407.48EFF162D1@welho-filter4.welho.com>
Received-SPF: none client-ip=83.102.41.26; envelope-from=khurtta@welho.com; helo=welho-filter4.welho.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.1
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.792, BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.418, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1c08Oa-0000bk-0u 27a2e30ec701df8c26fbc2aea4112d86
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: ID for Immutable
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20161028144407.48EFF162D1@welho-filter4.welho.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32699
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>

> Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mcmanus-immutable-00

|    o  User-Agents often provide two different refresh mechanisms: reload
|       and some form of force-reload.  The latter is used to rectify
|      interrupted loads and other corruption.  These reloads should
|      ignore immutable as well.

How about making it

Cache-Control: max-age=31536000, immutable=<hash-function-value>


So that immutable does not have effect if result of hash-function
does not give same value that what is value of immutable
cache control.

Several immutable cache controls are invalid if they are result
of same hash-function.

If server can't calculate hash-function over resource,
is is really static non-caching resource?

I think that this protects agaist that interrupted loads
becomes immutable.

/ Kari Hurtta

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email