Re: Querystring vs. Squid Cacheserver

>
> 4) I think URL's with '?' in it should be cachable (but maybe set
> Expires to 0 unless a Expires header is given). For contents which
> should not be cached POST requests or a proberly defined Expires header
> should be used

This is essentially what the HTTP 1.1 spec (draft 05, expires March
11th) says, except that it puts it the other way round, i.e. GET and
HEAD URLs with '?' are not cacheable unless they have an explicit
future expiry time. It is still a workaround for past abuses.

NB POST and PUT are never cacheable - if you want a cacheable
response, you must redirect properly (303, not 301/2).

I think squid is bypassing early on the basis that it is almost
certainly going to waste its time looking up the meta data and a
false negative doesn't break the semantics.

-- 
David Woolley - Office: David Woolley <djw@bts.co.uk>
BTS             Home: <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Wallington      TQ 2887 6421
England         51  21' 44" N,  00  09' 01" W (WGS 84)