IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Push and Caching

"Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com> Tue, 26 August 2014 16:50 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 490A01A87CC for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 09:50:13 -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 03mzDN1REVDY for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 09:50:12 -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 B811C1A6F5A for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 09:47:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1XMJrW-0001sz-0m for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:44:50 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:44:50 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1XMJrW-0001sz-0m@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <fielding@gbiv.com>) id 1XMJr5-0001rZ-Jl for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:44:23 +0000
Received: from sub4.mail.dreamhost.com ([69.163.253.135] helo=homiemail-a95.g.dreamhost.com) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <fielding@gbiv.com>) id 1XMJr4-0000mr-UB for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:44:23 +0000
Received: from homiemail-a95.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a95.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6D8F1E071; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 09:44:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=gbiv.com; h=subject :mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=gbiv.com; bh=h7ZIdAfpnvJ/gDK1PPVMQAJtfcM=; b=5JubjBmV9HtTqmWlPTTe0XyD76ME Sj2EelsKKF3+L2PSgrIMLI3tAaiV8tbCMs7OznxMUHwsd2d2VlnH6LWtqIyz1rEq nww740WJ8MsP4Rf/ElufU8fInApvqD0aPqeeTZBoNXTQK6D0jyuqweQCSbcceB3p hLmF/ySmpldF2bI=
Received: from [192.168.1.5] (ip68-228-83-124.oc.oc.cox.net [68.228.83.124]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: fielding@gbiv.com) by homiemail-a95.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 92BAA1E05C; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 09:44:01 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
In-Reply-To: <D92F296B-3E9A-42B3-978C-AC319C072C60@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 09:44:00 -0700
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9C64D35C-49BF-47F7-8D72-EFA2DA546FEA@gbiv.com>
References: <dc3d860ecb4b4d408a5ed0519a036e61@BL2PR03MB132.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CABkgnnWvKgyDcm-1jEKZUA2Qza9M46X+X_QybwuqRwvSUrTjNw@mail.gmail.com> <B6B89855-237F-44DA-B29C-2A3BB5CE0EED@mnot.net> <920b92b90a3c47ef8d450c903b83af40@DM2PR05MB670.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <d94a3acceb954583a61b0118381df417@BL2PR03MB132.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CAOdDvNpa5WR4LJbsgQaBE3bTSAc+gXfYqCmV+zmUzE5b7+1a9A@mail.gmail.com> <CECA0C1A-E64C-443A-87AF-22BC66286F72@mnot.net> <CABkgnnXVJA3R4qhc__k4j+_LzeS7B24VxfCZwBSfywepEx=tKA@mail.gmail.com> <40d03e3bb1df480e808e64fa29048880@BL2PR03MB132.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CABkgnnX-0X+JZfFYhm18b=bLidaq_pqN5s-K0NBS28m-s6+9Kg@mail.gmail.com> <233C8C21-BF80-4E07-9717-56630085E192@mnot.net> <CABkgnnW9Uq5R1KvuTXuT=xUdX_pVWikyAOMp=ixJe+c0NRs4Lg@mail.gmail.com> <CAH_y2NHV_966DSX4yX-=tfDPUkk-obCXFbJnPifQpFb1KFjYDg@mail.gmail.com> <7d2fdc975fec4646b21e86620a834e72@DM2PR05MB670.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <2C38B85E-7290-4AE3-A886-12A329DE449C@mnot.net> <7 dbd0d9cfc6a4d25b96beb20210f98fa@DM2PR05MB670.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CACweHNAxpaZRsK-Uu5biSvzt3kLhY4Bcw4pQgXSVcKYmKK-E_w@mail.gmail.com> <D92F296B-3E9A-42B3-978C-AC319C072C60@mnot.net>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
Received-SPF: none client-ip=69.163.253.135; envelope-from=fielding@gbiv.com; helo=homiemail-a95.g.dreamhost.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-3.450, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1XMJr4-0000mr-UB efe6f84c63340b2b10620fcf3f8deb7e
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Push and Caching
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/9C64D35C-49BF-47F7-8D72-EFA2DA546FEA@gbiv.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/26742
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 Aug 25, 2014, at 11:48 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:

> "fresh on the origin server" isn't relevant; what's relevant is whether they're fresh in the cache, and that can be determined by examining the response.
> 
> The issue at hand is whether the pushed response needs to be revalidated, as per the definition of no-cache.

"A recipient cache SHOULD consider a pushed response to be valid for the
duration of the connection (or until it is replaced during that connection)
even if the pushed response contains a "no-cache" cache directive."

....Roy

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status