cc'ing ALTO as Vijay suggested. Ben

On 2 May 2012, at 20:24, Ben Niven-Jenkins wrote:

> Rich, Ted,
> 
> On 2 May 2012, at 18:49, Richard Alimi wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Ben Niven-Jenkins
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 2 May 2012, at 17:28, Ted Hardie wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> It is not the cacheability of the results of post request that I was
>>>> referring to, but
>>>> the cacheability of the results of a 303.
>>> 
>>> Ah, I see. Yes I see your issue with the text now.
>>> 
>>> I believe there is an implicit assumption on the part of the authors that 
>>> in this model (receive a POST and return a 303) that the ALTO server could 
>>> be doing some level of "ALTO-application level caching" to avoid repeating 
>>> expensive queries by determining that a given POST would execute the same 
>>> query as a previous POST and therefore rather than run the query again, 
>>> just return a 303 to a resource on the ALTO server that contains the 
>>> results of the previous (identical) query.
>>> 
>> 
>> The word 'caching' was meant to apply to the response the ALTO Client
>> that actually contained the data it was looking for (that is, the
>> following GET).  An ALTO Server could also internally cache the
>> results to avoid repeated computation, but that was meant to be
>> implicit since this text was referring to the protocol messaging.
>> 
>> I understand Ted's point about the ambiguity in the text 'employ
>> caching for the response to a POST request'.  We can clean that up to
>> indicate that the caching is for the ALTO-level response (as returned
>> by the following GET) and not the response to the POST itself.
>> 
>>> But as I'm not an author I'll crawl back under my rock now.
>> 
>> No - come back! :)
> 
> As you asked so nicely, I wonder if the following (slightly wordy) change 
> would address Ted's comment:
> 
> OLD:
>   Note that it is possible for an ALTO Server to employ caching for the
>   response to a POST request.  This can be accomplished by returning an
>   HTTP 303 status code ("See Other") indicating to the ALTO Client that
>   the resulting Cost Map is available via a GET request to an alternate
>   URL (which may be cached).
> NEW:
> Note that it is possible for an ALTO Server to leverage caching HTTP 
> intermediaries for responses to both GET and POST requests by including 
> explicit freshness information (see Section 2.3.1 of [HTTPBIS Part6]).
> 
> Caching of POST requests is not widely implemented by HTTP intermediaries, 
> however an alternative approach is for an ALTO Server, in response to POST 
> requests, to return an HTTP 303 status code ("See Other") indicating to the 
> ALTO Client that the resulting Cost Map is available via a GET request to an 
> alternate URL. HTTP intermediaries that do not support caching of POST 
> requests could then cache the response to the GET request from the ALTO 
> Client following the alternate URL in the 303 response (if the response to 
> the subsequent GET request contains explicit freshness information).
> END
> 
> Ted went on to say:
>> Since cachability
>> is a major reason cited for the re-use of HTTP, some additional text
>> on the use cache control directives ("public" and "Max-age" seem
>> particularly important in this context) might also be useful.
> 
> I wonder whether a reference to Section 3.2 of HTTPBIS Part6 would suffice?
> 
> Ben
> 
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss

_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto

Reply via email to