Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 6326689
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 24, 20262026-05-24T17:08:18+00:00 2026-05-24T17:08:18+00:00

Most content I’ve observed being served from ASP.NET has only a Cache-Control: private header,

  • 0

Most content I’ve observed being served from ASP.NET has only a Cache-Control: private header, with no Last-Modified or Etag header.

I’ve also observed that browsers never seem to cache this content, evidenced by having never seen browsers issue anything but unconditional GET requests for it.

I’m trying to support the assertion that a resource having Cache-Control:private and no expiration data will be treated by all browsers as “do not cache”, but can’t find anything in the RFC (http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html) to confirm or refute it.

Is my assertion correct? Please cite!

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-24T17:08:20+00:00Added an answer on May 24, 2026 at 5:08 pm

    There’s an email chain over on W3C which dates back about 15 years: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/Issues/cache-private.html

    (1) “Cache-control: private” remains as in Roy’s draft, but with a
    mention of extensibility explicitly included. Single-user-agent caches
    are effectively allowed to ignore this directive.

    (2) “Cache-control: no-cache” is defined to mean exactly the same
    thing as “Cache-control: private”, but with no exception for
    user-agent caches.

    (3) We add “Cache-control: no-store”, which applies to the entire
    message and may be sent either in a response or in a request. If sent
    in a request, it means “do not store any part of either this request
    or any response to it.” If sent in a response, it means “do not store
    any part of either this response or the request that elicited it.”
    This applies to both single-user and shared caches. Caches should
    obey it but we explicitly caution against depending on it as a privacy
    mechanism. Users may explicitly store such responses outside of the
    caching system (e.g., with a “Save as” dialog. History buffers may
    store such responses as part of their normal operation.

    It goes on to say:

    The “private” directive indicates that parts of the response message
    are intended for a single user and must not be cached except within a
    private (non-shared) cache controlled by the user agent.

    And most importantly:

    Anyway, it seems like the main difference between “private” and
    “no-cache” is that “private” allows caching in a user agent’s
    single-user cache, whereas “no-cache” does not.

    So on this basis I’m taking it to mean that non-private caching is disallowed (i.e. at the proxy layer), but private caching is allowed (i.e. within the browser). I know this is simply discussion about a draft spec but it’s the best explanation I’ve been able to find so far.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

There is a directory in the standard ASP.NET template Content where most people seem
It appears like something is stopping my errors from displaying normally an in ASP.NET
I have a resources web app, which only has static content, such as images,
I have Apache HTTPD configured to add a cache header to requests for most
Most of my content is in a new table I have added to JOOMLA
I've got an XHTML 1.0 Transitional document. Most of the content is in English,
Most people have heard of Content Management Systems. However, what basic features should an
Here's a tough one: I'm working on a website where most of the content
The most recent version of Firefox has messed up our internal wiki layout so
I'm currently experiencing problems with static content - most noticeably jQuery datepicker images, but

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.