https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45341
--- Comment #6 from Ruediger Pluem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-07-14 00:21:10 PST --- (In reply to comment #5) > (Jan does appear to be requesting also with a query string, > http://server.aa/creative?bannerId=618167&seqNo=4&set=sec) > > Yes, that is the sequence I have figured. But I'm not sure that the 304 > response without an Expires header is strictly erroneous. If that is clear in > the protocol I can file it as a bug in Wicket instead of an improvement, but I > haven't been able to find anything definitive. > > I don't see how a plain 304 "tells the cache that the cached response is > unusable and needs to be ejected". The cache has asked the back end if the This is because of 13.9 in RFC2616 > resource has changed since a date. The answer is no, and the cache would do The resource hasn't changed, but its metadata has as no expires header is delivered anymore. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
