On 1/11/06, Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 11 Jan 2006, at 21:46, Brian Sullivan wrote: > > > I am using CookieCrumbler as an authentication method on a Zope site. > > > > I am looking at the feasibility of putting multi CookieCrumbler > > objects (all with the same settings -- except for the cache setting) > > on a site in order to allow some parts of the site to be cached in an > > upstream proxy and forbidding others. > > > > Is this a reasonable thing to do? Will it achieve the result I am > > looking for? > > I will not do what you expect to do. The first cookie crumbler to do > authentication sets the cookie and even if other cookie crumblers get > involved they will not just overwrite that cookie because the > lifetime setting on their cookie is different. >
In some testing I found that the headers (at least the upstream cache setting which is what I was interested in) does seem to be different depending on the first CookieCrumbler to handle the content (I set one in a subdirectory to cache setting 'public' and the main system level one to 'private')- which would seem to imply that higher placed ones recognize the cache header setting and avoid changing it? This seemed to do what I want. If this isn't a strategy for doing what I want to do can anybody thing of one? I have a site that is authenticated using CookieCrumbler. I have a whole bunch of static files/objects, some fairly large isolated in a subfolder on the site. I want the static objects to be cached by upstream proxies, but all other parts of the site not cacheable. _______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )