Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-bugs-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 51906 invoked by uid 500); 7 Jul 2003 10:47:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact bugs-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Reply-To: "Apache HTTPD Bugs Notification List" Delivered-To: mailing list bugs@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 51894 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2003 10:47:16 -0000 Date: 7 Jul 2003 10:49:42 -0000 Message-ID: <20030707104942.626.qmail@nagoya.betaversion.org> From: bugzilla@apache.org To: bugs@httpd.apache.org Cc: Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 16133] - validation of no-cache responses with Expires header X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16133 validation of no-cache responses with Expires header ------- Additional Comments From sragavan@novell.com 2003-07-07 10:49 ------- Created an attachment (id=7118) no-cache directive was not compared while storing the response in the cache. It is now compared. Also headers specified by no-cache will not be cached now. Used / Extended request_rec structure for holding the header fields that needs to be filtered to provide to disk / mem cache. If an optimal solution is available then i am happy to hear that. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org