Re: Why MD5 Headers are Imperative

On 17 Aug 2006, at 12:21, Julian Reschke wrote:
> > "Except for additional traffic and delay" for one user turns into  
> > a real scalability nightmare on the server.  What I'm saying is  
> > that this problem will be so frequent that the spec is addressing  
> > the 20, not the 80, of 80/20. Because the least-frequent GET  
> > request will be coming from an APP client, why should the least- 
> > likely use case invalidate the cache strategy which was designed  
> > on the premise of the most-likely use case of read-only?
>
> Maybe I'm missing something, but feed readers by default read the  
> feed, not the individual members. As long as the ETag of the *feed*  
> doesn't change, why would there ever be a subsequent request to  
> refresh a member?

+1