Re: Confusion about Age: accuracy vs. safety
- I'm sorry, but this is incredible. I demonstrated how the entire
network of New Zealand (3.6 million people and the highest tech
ratio of any nation) can be completely disabled by Jeff's
Aside from the minor point that you have "demonstrated" no such
thing (since you almost certainly don't have sufficient data to
to quantify the amount of overestimation error would be introduced
by the algorithm in the spec, or to quantify the resultant number
of cache misses caused by errors of this magnitude), your argument
is based on a premise that you know to be false, because you insisted
on its falsity during the design of HTTP/1.1. To wit: the spec
explicitly allows your caches to ignore the expiration times (because
you insisted on this) and, if so, it hardly matters what the Age is.
- koen@... said:
> It will be interesting to see if certain parts of the draft never getEven stronger.
> implemented by cache implementers. If that is the case, I believe
> that the IETF process allows us to cut these parts when going from
> proposed to RFC.
The IETF rules REQUIRE that EVERY feature of the spec has at least
2 interoperable implementations when the spec moves from Proposed
to Draft Standard, AND that this is documented to the IESG.
Deleting features IS allowed.
So when it's time, it's time either for some high speed coding or
for some high speed scissor work....
Harald T. Alvestrand