Re: Confusion about Age: accuracy vs. safety
Anselm Baird-Smith (abaird@w3.org)
Wed, 4 Sep 1996 18:58:12 +0500
Roy T. Fielding writes:
> > I can speak for myself here: as I am not as wise as you guys, and as I
> > don't have much time for discussions, I did implement *exactly* (as
> > faithfully as possible - see code below), Jeff's pseudo code.
>
> Anselm, I believe that what you have implemented is just the calculation
> of the Age upon receipt, right? The question is: does the proxy code
> add an Age header field (or to the value of an existing Age header)
> when it forwards a message not from its own cache?
>
> There is nothing wrong with the calculation of Age upon receipt. The
> problem would be if intermediaries added to the Age value (the age as
> perceived by the outbound clients) when no aging occurs. If they do add
> to the age, then Age becomes meaningless as a mechanism for ensuring a
> lower bound in the presence of clock skew.
Oops, sorry for the confusion, you are right. I am getting tired these
days...
Anselm.