Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?

Strictly, as a request directive it means "you can't store the response to this request" -- it says nothing about whether or not you can satisfy the request from a cache.

However, I imagine most people would interpret it as implying "no-cache"; you're still conformant if you do.

See also:
  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-11#section-3.2.1

On 23/09/2010, at 4:27 AM, Alex Rousskov wrote:

> Hello,
>
> One interpretation of RFC 2616 allows the proxy to serve hits when
> the request contains "Cache-Control: no-store". Do you think such an
> interpretation is valid?
>
> no-store
> The purpose of the no-store directive is to prevent the
> inadvertent release or retention of sensitive information (for
> example, on backup tapes). The no-store directive applies to the
> entire message, and MAY be sent either in a response or in a
> request. If sent in a request, a cache MUST NOT store any part of
> either this request or any response to it.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Alex.

--
Mark Nottingham       mnot_at_yahoo-inc.com