Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

must-understand semantics #661

Closed
mnot opened this issue Jan 7, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #668
Closed

must-understand semantics #661

mnot opened this issue Jan 7, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #668
Assignees
@mnot
Labels
caching has-proposal

Comments

@mnot
Copy link
Member

mnot commented Jan 7, 2021

It occurs to me that if we specify Cache-Control: must-understand to always be used in conjunction with no-store, and that its semantics are that caches that understand the semantics of the status code can ignore the no-store, all current implementations should already be conferment (if not optimal). Currently, I'm not aware of any cache that implements must-understand (because it's new).
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@mnot mnot

Labels
caching has-proposal
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Modify must-understand to be backwards-compatible httpwg/http-core
1 participant
@mnot