User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6a) Gecko/20031002
Michael Myers wrote:
This works for me, especially the part about getting definitive
on 2560 as it stands. Ambarish?
I've been thinking about something more, I hope it doesn't reopen the
whole can of worms.
What would you think if it'd also define an extension that the client
can use in a request including a nonce, in order to indicate it will
accept an answer without a nonce if it includes the pre-produced extension.
The server would be breaking RFC 2560 by sending back the pre-produced
answer, but only with a client that has explicitly indicated it is
expecting this behaviour.
This, if acceptable, would enable to fully avoid the round-trip with
compatible servers.
Legacy servers would send back an error to this kind of request if they
can not supply a nonce, which does not break the expected behaviour.
- define an extension that enable a responder to
assert the answer is a
cached answer and not an answer to a nonce-less request
I'll correct myself : "is a pre-produced answer and this server can not
successfully answer requests requiring a nonce."