nanog mailing list archives
Re: Web caching liability
From: Paul A Vixie <paul () vix com>
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 10:24:31 -0800
they've been problems for a long time; some of their proxy servers hold cache data for far too long. i have some web discussion pages that are effectively useless for aol subscribers because aol even caches cgi generated stuff with obvious cgi related extensions like ".cgi" and ".pl".
nowhere in the standards is ".pl" recommended to be treated as an implicit Cache-Control:. if you tag your responses with Cache-Control: headers that make them do what you want (in this case, make the response uncacheable) then you won't have the above-described problem.
Current thread:
- AOL Web caching? Brian Horvitz (Jan 02)
- Web caching liability Turnando Fuad (Jan 02)
- Message not available
- Re: Web caching liability Jay R. Ashworth (Jan 02)
- Message not available
- Re: Web caching liability Richard Welty (Jan 02)
- Re: Web caching liability Paul A Vixie (Jan 02)
- Re: Web caching liability Dean Gaudet (Jan 05)
- Re: Web caching liability Dan Mosedale (Jan 06)
- Web caching liability Turnando Fuad (Jan 02)
- Re: Web caching liability Paul A Vixie (Jan 02)
- Re: Web caching liability Kent W. England (Jan 07)
- Re: Web caching liability Jon Zeeff (Jan 07)
- Re: Web caching liability Paul R.D. LANtinga (Jan 06)