In message <de028c9e-4618-4ebc-8477-6e308753c...@dynamine.net>, "Michael S. Fis cher" writes: >On Jan 18, 2010, at 5:20 AM, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>> My suggestion is to also look at Cache-control: no-cache, possibly also >> private and no-store and obey those. > >Why wasn't it doing it all along? Because we wanted to give the backend a chance to tell Varnish one thing with respect to caching, and the client another. I'm not saying we hit the right decision, and welcome any consistent, easily explainable policy you guys can agree on. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list varnish-misc@projects.linpro.no http://projects.linpro.no/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
