Re: Cache-Control: no-store

2011-12-02 Thread Bjarne
On 12/01/2011 09:37 PM, Christian Biesinger wrote: On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Bjarne wrote: In "netwerk/test/unit/test_cacheflags.js" there is a test (second-last) for the combination "no-store" and nsIRequest.LOAD_FROM_CACHE. It expects to load the entry from cache. Can this be correct? (

Re: Cache-Control: no-store

2011-12-02 Thread Bjarne
On 12/01/2011 09:18 PM, Christian Biesinger wrote: On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Bjarne wrote: >> nsIRequest.INHIBIT_PERSISTENT_CACHING: Entry is stored in mem-cache and can be reused for subsequent requests, including from view-source. indeed I filed bug #707140 to resolve an issue wrt

Re: Cache-Control: no-store

2011-12-01 Thread Christian Biesinger
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Bjarne wrote: > On 12/01/2011 09:18 PM, Christian Biesinger wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Bjarne  wrote: >>> >>> >>> It doesn't seem like we handle "no-store" on requests >>> - do we want to do that? (Rfc2616 explicitly allows it.) >> >> >> Keep in mind

Re: Cache-Control: no-store

2011-12-01 Thread Bjarne
On 12/01/2011 09:18 PM, Christian Biesinger wrote: On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Bjarne wrote: It doesn't seem like we handle "no-store" on requests - do we want to do that? (Rfc2616 explicitly allows it.) Keep in mind that RFC 2616 often means proxy servers when it talks about caches. I

Re: Cache-Control: no-store

2011-12-01 Thread Christian Biesinger
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Bjarne wrote: > In "netwerk/test/unit/test_cacheflags.js" there > is a test (second-last) for the combination > "no-store" and nsIRequest.LOAD_FROM_CACHE. It > expects to load the entry from cache. Can this > be correct? (nsIRequest.LOAD_FROM_CACHE is the > flag use

Re: Cache-Control: no-store

2011-12-01 Thread Christian Biesinger
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Bjarne wrote: > Ok - I'll sum up my understanding of these issues > but grab the opportunity to raise a few questions: > > "Cache-Control: no-store" on a response: Entry is > stored in mem-cache in order to be used by view- > source, but never reused for subsequent

Re: Cache-Control: no-store

2011-12-01 Thread Bjarne
On 12/01/2011 12:53 AM, Bjarne wrote: It doesn't seem like we handle "no-store" on requests - do we want to do that? (Rfc2616 explicitly allows it.) Bug 706806 - Bjarne ___ dev-tech-network mailing list dev-tech-network@lists.mozilla.org https://list

Re: Cache-Control: no-store

2011-12-01 Thread Bjarne
On 11/30/2011 10:41 PM, Bjarne wrote: > On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 12:49 -0500, Boris Zbarsky wrote: >> On 11/30/11 8:16 AM, Bjarne wrote: >>> Is the above the common understanding of this directive? >> >> The common understanding as used by actual sites is "don't cache, don't >> allow via sessi

Re: Cache-Control: no-store

2011-11-30 Thread Bjarne
Ok - I'll sum up my understanding of these issues but grab the opportunity to raise a few questions: "Cache-Control: no-store" on a response: Entry is stored in mem-cache in order to be used by view- source, but never reused for subsequent requests. It doesn't seem like we handle "no-store" on r

Re: Cache-Control: no-store

2011-11-30 Thread Christian Biesinger
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Bjarne wrote: > [ Forwarded from a mail-thread on necko-devs. > The topic is how to understand the http-header > "Cache-Control: no-store". ] > > So, if I understand you both correctly, the > expected behaviour is to not store such responses > at all, not even in t