|
| Hi Egbert,
Thanks for your reply.
Although knowing that this header exists for "cache eficiency" on the
client's behalf, there's obviously some privacy issues here, namely:
a) While the server is up and there's no change in the content it provides
the ETag value remains the same, *tagging* (and I hate this word) the
server for a long period of time. This scenario is the majority of web
servers around.
b) Think. Why should it be an unique ID? For the purpouse it serves, a
"Changed: True/False" (or the like) header would sufice.
c) Also I consider it redundant at least with already existing cache
control directives.
There's no subversive intention on the will of remaining anonymous and
preserving privacy. Only on the intention of stoping or controling this
will, there is.
Regards,
rusga
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 11:41:05 -0000, Egbert Nierop (MVP for IIS)
<egbert_nierop@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
> "rusga" <reply@newsgroup.plz> wrote in message
> news:op.s02nuxo2umizor@localhost...
>
> The only way is an ISAPI filter currently.
> Is there a specific reason you want to do this?
>
|
|