https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45341
--- Comment #7 from Nathan Hamblen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-07-14 05:57:57 PST --- I know about 13.9, but I don't see where it says that all previous headers must be discarded. I do see that they must be updated if present, in 10.3.5: "If a cache uses a received 304 response to update a cache entry, the cache MUST update the entry to reflect any new field values given in the response." But there aren't any new field values given. Section 13.9.4, in talking about max-age=0 which is specifically where I'm having the problem, says simply "If the server replies with 304 (Not Modified), then the cache can return its now validated copy to the client with a 200 (OK) response." There is (always) some ambiguity, but I don't see why mod_cache would choose to interpret the back-end server's plain 304 as a request to nullify the cached Expires header to make the resource retroactively uncacheable. And even if that were the best way to read the situation, 10.3.5 tells you how to recover from a similar problem: "If a 304 response indicates an entity not currently cached, then the cache MUST disregard the response and repeat the request without the conditional." -- 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]
