httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <>
Subject Re: [STATUS] Sun Apr 13 19:08:09 PDT 1997
Date Mon, 14 Apr 1997 20:09:24 GMT
On Mon, 14 Apr 1997, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>      o Doesn't issue "Vary: Host" in responses because it would appear
>        in *all* responses and would therefore chew up bandwidth
>        unnecessarily.  [I'm still not entirely comfortable with this;
>        just because Apache's (current) implementation means we'd send
>        the header every time doesn't == it's okey to violate the RFC in
>        the interests of performance.  Just IMHO.]

It doesn't issue "Vary: Host" because any compliant proxy would have to
use the host header anyhow to direct the hit to the correct origin server,
and so all requests implicitly vary on Host.  I think Roy considers
this an oversight in RFC2068, but don't let me put words in his mouth...
Hey Roy are you keeping a list of deficiencies of RFC2068?  I know you've
cursed a few times when we've tried to implement things here :)

>     On the 2.0 front..  Is there any current mechanism for recording
>     things for consideration?  If not, should there be?  If so, should
>     it be readable by our `customers' so they can comment?  I ask
>     because I know I can think of about half-a-dozen things, but they're
>     either only in my head or scattered through megabytes of archived
>     mail..

If you can hold off a week or two it'd be great.  I mean we could start
using [2.0] in the subject to start talking about it, but I think we'd
just distract ourselves too much.  I too have a list, and I'm sure others
do as well.


View raw message