bug with X-Accel-Expires 0 ?

[Jérôme Loyet]

2010/7/1 Maxim Dounin <mdounin at mdounin.ru>:
> Hello!
>
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 05:21:26PM +0200, Jérôme Loyet wrote:
>
>> Igor, maxim,
>>
>> did you have time to look at this bug ?
>
> Not really, but I tend to like your aproach.  If we are going to
> preserve specific hide headers for cached replies it should be
> configurable separately.  Another possible improvement is to
> trigger this hiding only when serving reply from cache (but not
> in initial reply, as 'Cache-Control: no-cache="header-name"'
> should do per RFC 2616).
>
> On the other hand, we've recently discussed related issue in
> Russian mailing list:
>
> http://nginx.org/pipermail/nginx-ru/2010-June/034987.html
>
> Consensus seems to be that answers with Set-Cookie should be
> considered non-cacheable by default.  And probably all these
> cache-specific hiding stuff will just go away.

If it's the case Set-Cookie will be handle like "X-Accel-Redirect",
"X-Accel-Expires", "Expires" or "Cache-Control" and it'll be possible
to allow to cache responses with Set-Cookie by adding "Set-Cookie" to
"proxy_ignore_headers". Am I right ?

I'm sorry to ask confirmation but the google translation of the
russian mailing list is not that clear :)

Thx
++ Jerome