Subject: Negotiated private cache storage allocation

From: Mike Kelly <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 20:16:16 +0000

Hi,

Is anyone aware of any proposals that extend HTTP to allow servers and
clients to negotiate client-side storage allocation for client-side
(private) caches?

Basically, I'm looking for a way for a server to indicate how much
storage should be allocated for caching responses from a particular
domain name, and possibly also for the client to be able to indicate
how much allocation was actually possible.

Aside from that, if you have any thoughts on whether or not this is
really feasible or is just a plain bad idea - please let me know

Thanks,
Mike

---

From: Amos Jeffries <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:08:01 +1300

> really feasible or is just a plain bad idea - please let me know

 Can you explain why this is needed please? It seems to be something the 
 browser agents should be allocating dynamically internally instead of 
 pre-allocating blocks of wasted space.

 For an example; I can just imagine sites like SourceForge negotiating a 
 few dozen GB to be allocated then deallocated for a visitor, who only 
 hits once on a 20KB page, simply because it allows code repository 
 browsing with huge memory requirements elsewhere on the site.

 AYJ

---

From: Mike Kelly <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 21:55:37 +0000

I think the negotiation process could, and should, allow for UAs (e.g.
browsers) to consult with a user before making the allocation. No?

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Amos Jeffries <[email-masked]> wrote:
> For an example; I can just imagine sites like SourceForge negotiating a few
> dozen GB to be allocated then deallocated for a visitor, who only hits once
> on a 20KB page, simply because it allows code repository browsing with huge
> memory requirements elsewhere on the site.
>
> AYJ
>
>

---

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:25:57 +1100

Some thoughts along vaguely similar lines -

http://www.mnot.net/blog/2011/08/28/better_browser_caching

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/

---

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:51:53 +1100

I'm a little uncomfortable calling this "negotiation"; the model I have in mind is that a site might request a larger allocation than the default, and the UA would ask the user (or possibly, the user would pre-configure to accept or deny). Wherever possible, though, the browser should probably use a heuristic, to keep it simple (From a UX perspective).

Cheers,

On 15/12/2011, at 9:38 AM, Mike Kelly wrote:

> Nice one thanks Mark, +1 to all of that post
> 
> What do you think about handling the negotiation via HTTP?
> 
> Cheers,
> Mike
> 
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]> wrote:

--
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/

---

From: Mike Kelly <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 22:38:28 +0000

Cheers,
Mike

---

From: Mike Kelly <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:24:58 +0000

I think my terminology is wrong then in that case because that is
basically the model I am looking for. By negotiation, I'd simply meant
the process of a server requesting a cache storage allocation from the
UA.

I'm personally less keen on the heuristic idea from a standard
protocol perspective. I do think it's a good idea though, and
definitely something UAs could develop and optimise as part of their
on-going performance arms-race :)

Really, I would just like a standard way to use an HTTP response to
challenge the UA, which can then ask its user to grant or reject a
cache storage quota.

Cheers,
Mike