httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Slemko <>
Subject Re: Redirect to negotiated docs (PR#649)
Date Fri, 15 Aug 1997 15:52:42 GMT
On Fri, 15 Aug 1997, Paul Sutton wrote:

> PR#649 suggests that the results of a content-negotiation is a *redirect*
> to the chosen variant. This will allow proxies and clients to cache the
> variant as the resource for the requested URI. Now caching the result of
> sever-based negotiation is a bad idea because (pre-1.1) clients & browsers
> may cache and serve up the wrong result of subsequent requests for the
> same request URI. But Apache does allow the "CacheNegotiatedDocs" redirect
> to allow clients and proxies to cache the result of negotiation. 
> The patch in #649 does not work properly, but does anyone else think it is
> reasonable to redirect to the result of server negotiation? I don't even
> agree with CacheNegotiatedDocs so I would say not. But it is hard to
> reject the patch with "no because caching negotiated resources is bad
> pre-1.1" since the submitter can point to CacheNegotiatedDocs and say "so
> why does Apache allow it then?". Which I can't answer. Why does it?

Assuming you include multiviews, this would destroy sites using them,
especially with clients that don't do persistent connections.  Even if
they do, it is a 2*RTT increase in time per file.

> So my suggested answer to this would be "This won't be added to Apache
> because caching negotiated resources is not good, and as clients and
> proxies move to HTTP/1.1 this will become irrelevant anyway". And close
> the PR. 
> //pcs

View raw message