问题
For the following image: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/2010-brown-bear.jpg
There isn't any cache-control header. And based on here even if you don't send anything then it will use its default value which is private. That being doesn't the URLSession need to perform a conditional request to make sure its still valid?
Is there anything in the headers that allows it to make such a conditional request? Because I don't see cache-control, max-age, Expires. The only things I see is are Last-Modified & Etag but again it needs to validate against the server or does not specifying anything make it cache indefinitely?! I've already read this answer, but doesn't discuss this scenario.
Yet it's being cached by the URLSession. (Because if I turn off internet, still it gets downloaded)
Only other thing I see is "Strict-Transport-Security": max-age=106384710.
Does that effect caching? I've already look here and don't believe it should. From what I the max-age for the HSTS key is there only to enforce it to be accessed from HTTPS for a certain period of time. Once the max-age is reached then access through HTTP is also possible.
These are all the headers that I'm getting back:
Date : Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:15:33 GMT
Content-Length : 215104
Access-Control-Expose-Headers: Age, Date, Content-Length, Content-Range, X-Content-Duration, X-Cache, X-Varnish
Via : 1.1 varnish (Varnish/5.1), 1.1 varnish (Varnish/5.1)
Age : 18581
Etag : 00e21950bf432476c91b811bb685b6af
Strict-Transport-Security : max-age=106384710; includeSubDomains; preload
Accept-Ranges : bytes
Content-Type : image/jpeg
Last-Modified : Fri, 04 Oct 2013 23:30:08 GMT
Access-Control-Allow-Origin : *
Timing-Allow-Origin : *
x-analytics : https=1;nocookies=1
x-object-meta-sha1base36 : 42tq5grg9rq1ydmqd4z5hmmqj6h2309
x-varnish : 60926196 48388489, 342256851 317476424
x-cache-status : hit-front
x-trans-id : tx08ed43bbcc1946269a9a3-005bd97070
x-timestamp : 1380929407.39127
x-cache : cp1076 hit/7, cp1090 hit/7
x-client-ip : 2001:558:1400:4e:171:2a98:fad6:2579
This question was asked because of this comment
回答1:
doesn't the URLSession need to perform a conditional request to make sure its still valid?
The user-agent should be performing a conditional request, because of the
Etag: 00e21950bf432476c91b811bb685b6af
present. My desktop Chrome certainly does performs the conditional request (and gets back 304 Not Modified).
But it's free not to
But a user-agent is perfectly free to decide on it's own. It's perfectly free to look at:
Last-Modified: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 23:30:08 GMT
and decide that there resource is probably good for the next five minutes1. And if the network connection is down, its perfectly reasonable and correct to display the cached version instead. In fact, your browser would show you web-sites even while your dial-up 0.00336 Mbps dial-up modem was disconnected.
You wouldn't want your browser to show you nothing, when it knows full well it can show you something. It becomes even more useful when we're talking about poor internet connectivity not because of slow dialup and servers that go down, but of mobile computing, and metered data plans.
1I say 5 minutes, because in the early web, servers did not give cache hints. So browsers cached things without even being asked. And 5 minutes was a good number. And you used Ctrl+F5 (or was it Shift+F5, or was it Shift+Click, or was it Alt+Click) to force the browser to bypass the cache.
来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/53086297/does-not-setting-cache-control-automatically-enable-caching-even-without-conditi