On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 11:15:45AM +0200, Daniel Margolis wrote:
> Regarding caching, Viktor, Binu, do you believe this is useful to allow?
I think it is useful.
> While it can be done safely (by simply ensuring the cache-control headers
> set by the mta-sts.provider.com host--i.e. the one behind the proxy--are
> "correct"), it doesn't strike me as necessary; perhaps it's simpler and
> safer to simply recommend against HTTP caching. The expected request rate
> is low, and I would assume any provider behind the proxy can handle more
> traffic than the proxy itself, so caching isn't quite as compelling, no?
The provider can likely handle the query rate just fine, but serving
cached content is much cheaper than making upstream connections to
the provider. So I think this is attractive for the site doing the
delegation.
--
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
