#453: Returning the freshest response

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Tue, 07 May 2013 07:35 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 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 546C721F8F62 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 May 2013 00:35:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.574
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.574 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.025, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kHtQr+XNUB7Z for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 May 2013 00:35:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3B7F21F884F for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 7 May 2013 00:35:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UZcQL-0005Ce-AX for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 07 May 2013 07:34:57 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 07:34:57 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UZcQL-0005Ce-AX@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1UZcQA-0005BK-Op for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 07 May 2013 07:34:46 +0000
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net ([216.86.168.182]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1UZcQ9-00031j-Nw for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 07 May 2013 07:34:46 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.80] (unknown [118.209.105.214]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 573CE22E1F4; Tue, 7 May 2013 03:34:21 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgntPNoUehbYjJ_bJeHqgWO28LEDwX9+yKR67CONuh6kzg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 17:34:17 +1000
Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <49B75184-58C2-4D0E-BBBC-FD5E9C819F3F@mnot.net>
References: <E56A5FA7-555D-4283-95A1-FD0030D4616A@mnot.net> <CABkgnnXbDfXN1KA-AfHcW=macw44hK346z0UuYMZYx8OXBZv4g@mail.gmail.com> <51578395.6070800@treenet.co.nz> <CAF6rxgntPNoUehbYjJ_bJeHqgWO28LEDwX9+yKR67CONuh6kzg@mail.gmail.com>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.182; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-07.mxes.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-3.338, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1UZcQ9-00031j-Nw 34af1bb107609031382294cde27266a2
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: #453: Returning the freshest response
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/49B75184-58C2-4D0E-BBBC-FD5E9C819F3F@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17863
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>

Updating Amos' proposal with Martin's suggestion, and downgrading from SHOULD to MAY leaves us with:

> If multiple selected responses are available, the cache will need to choose
> one to use. When a selecting header has a known mechanism for doing so
> (e.g., qvalues on Accept and similar request headers), that mechanism MAY
> be used to select preferred responses; of the remainder, the most recent
> response (as determined by the Date header field) is used, as per Section 4.


Does that work for everyone?

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