httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian Behlendorf <br...@organic.com>
Subject Re: Stuff in my sandbox...
Date Wed, 02 Aug 1995 02:33:26 GMT



Summary: This is so fucking confusing.  I was trying to replicate this
behavior and see where it was happening.  I am somewhat convinced it has more
to do with broken proxies than a broken netscape.... 

www.organic.com is still a shambhala 0.6.0 - but I installed 0.8.5 on a 
higher port and it had no difference.  I also tried this against an 0.6.5 
server out there (www.cnet.com) but it didn't have these problems.

1) load www.organic.com locally from a fresh disk/memory cache.  No 
problems, looks and works like a champ.

2) hit "reload" on netscape - the main page request gets a "200" 
response, the inlined images get a "304" response, and everyone is happy.

3) loaded www.organic.com through web.mit.edu port 80.  First request, 
everything is fine.... second request, the inlined images are fuct.

4) loaded www.organic.com through wwwcache.hensa.ac.uk 8080.  First 
request is fine, second request is *fine*, third request is *fine*... 

I couldn't find any other public proxies - looks like Prodigy and AOL 
shut theirs off.  web.mit.edu is running a CERN proxy, and Hensa's 
running a Netscape-Proxy.  

Ugh!

This is frustrating.  I'm tempted to say a bugward compatibility should 
only go in with a User-Agent check (and a STERN comment in the 
README's!), or not at all.  

I'm really interested in hearing why going through hensa works and 
web.mit doesn't.

	Brian


On Tue, 1 Aug 1995, Rob Hartill wrote:
> >    Date: Tue, 01 Aug 1995 17:21:02 -0400
> >    From: Roy Fielding <fielding@beach.w3.org>
> > 
> >    Don't you dare release that code!  Protecting network caching is
> >    far more important than adding a bug to Apache just to bend over
> >    backwards in response to a bug in this month's version of Navigator.
> > 
> >    Screw That!
> > 
> > Summary of conclusions: we're probably going to have a maintenance
> > release in about two weeks, so we needn't be "broken" longer than
> > that.  At that point, probably the best thing to do is (as Roy
> > suggests below), to check User-agent: in addition to Pragma: no-cache
> > before deciding to ignore If-last-modified.  However, in the meantime,
> > I think Netscape-friendliness is better for everyone than strict
> > conformance to the standard (just as I believed the same about Arena
> > friendliness when it refused to deal with attributes on media types).
> 
> I don't want to start a flame war on this subject, so I'll say
> my piece and leave it at that.
> 
> Having Apache 0.8.5 take notice of "Pragma: no-cache" is a bad thing.
> Every reload to my server from Netscape users is going to cause a
> retransmission of the unchanged document.
> I don't know what problem Cliff's contact has, but I find it difficult to
> believe that it has anything to do with how an end server handles
> "Pragma: no-cache", it's more likely a proxy cache problem, a broken
> client or something else broken with Apache (in order of most probable).
> 
> Has anyone had any reports of problems from their users with <= 0.8.4 ???
> 
> Cardiff has the "Pragma" check switched off, and it works fine via
> the public proxy at wwwcache.hensa.ac.uk 8080. None of the hoards of
> AOL and prodigy users have complained so far. I'll keep it switched
> off until someone can point the finger of blame at Apache.
> 
> Bottom line: the new code is wrong (cf Roy's comments), we have one
> unconfirmed problem report, but lots of confirmed satisfied customers.
> 
> tie my vote to Roy's. If he changes his -1, mine changes too.
> 
> 
> 
> rob
> 

--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
brian@organic.com  brian@hyperreal.com  http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/


Mime
View raw message