Hi,
David J N Begley wrote:
> I don't get it - why is this necessary when (certainly from our stats, and
> seemingly others based upon problems people are seeing with Microsoft's
> site) clearly Microsoft's stuff can be cached *already*? Or does Squid
> 1.1 act differently to 1.0?
Perhaps for other objects within MS, but, http://www.microsoft.com
tells us not to cache it, three times in the MIME headers.
>
> Hasn't stopped anyone else causing problems - why should it stop us from
> trying to fix 'em (as terrible as protocol violation is)?
Yeah, but if we break protocols in response to others breaking them,
the word "protocol" loses it's meaning...
-- miguel a.l. paraz <map@iphil.net> http://www.iphil.net/~map/ PGP: 0x43F0D011 iphil communications: isp/intranet design and implementation, makati city, phReceived on Sun Oct 27 1996 - 06:53:41 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:33:22 MST