On Sat, 02 Nov 2002, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:

> In a related vein, DNF and friends should perhaps be 404s.

Only if you want fproxy to be unusable.  Too many broken browsers
substitute their own crap for the server-supplied 404.


> > It would also be sensible to return ETag header to allow additional
> > validity check for stale/fresh content. 
> > (http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec13.html#sec13.3 )
> 
> I'll think about that.

ETag is just a string, so the base64-encoded key of the current file
would do nicely (for key responses) and something unique-ish for the
fproxy html/graphics.


> My current caching target are the web interface images (and static
> pages), as these make most sense to cache. For freenet content, I
> don't know, we may actualy want to actively prevent caching.

No, setting a reasonable Expires: time is a lot more friendly.  We do
prevent caching dynamic redirects already, (so you can retrieve a
splitfile more then once) but I'd prefer to not hammer fred every time
I hit TFE.  Setting the Expires: header to +infinity for normal keys
rollover-time for mapped keys seems logical.  Last-modified: is
important as it tells the cache how volitile the page is.  Set it to
1-year ago since we don't really know how old things are.  (ctime(0) may
have special properties in some browsers/proxies, or I'd say use that)

--Dan

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 155 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021106/70b133e5/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to