Re: possible IMS missbehaviour

From: Henrik Nordstrom <hno@dont-contact.us>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 19:58:45 +0200 (CEST)

On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Mati wrote:

> Suppose, that in response to this conditional request server sends 200 OK
> with new Last-Modified, and new response body.

Ok.

> Squid reads the headers, and in handleIMSReply()
> decides whether the client should get old or new entry (function
> clientGetsOldEntry)...
> clientGetsOldEntry acknowledges 200 OK status and returns false (meaning
> that client should get new entry)

Ok.

> The processMiss() is called and it repeats the !same! conditional request
> the server has already responded to.
>
> My question is (as usual ;): is it correct?

The client is supposed to get the first 200 reply.

A new request should only be initiated if the reply is incompatible with
the client request possibly due to the IMS done by Squid.. but I am not
sure what cases this would be.

Regards
Henrik
Received on Tue Apr 20 2004 - 11:58:47 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Thu Apr 29 2004 - 12:00:03 MDT