Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81439 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 83255 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2015 16:45:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 30 Jan 2015 16:45:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 217.147.176.214 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.214 mail4-2.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.214] ([217.147.176.214:36005] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 65/09-35409-E35BBC45 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:45:51 -0500 Received: (qmail 5086 invoked by uid 89); 30 Jan 2015 16:45:47 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 5080, pid: 5083, t: 0.0646s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.8?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@86.189.147.37) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 30 Jan 2015 16:45:47 -0000 Message-ID: <54CBB53B.9080703@lsces.co.uk> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:45:47 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <54CB8AED.8040803@php.net> <54CB93A3.8090108@php.net> In-Reply-To: <54CB93A3.8090108@php.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 30/01/15 14:22, Michael Wallner wrote: > - default etag hash algo for dynamic response bodies has changed to > sha1 from crc32 and cannot be changed through an INI setting > > etags on dynamic content are, well, subject to change anyway, > so I don't see major troubles I presume that a calculated etag value can be returned as an alternative. Something dictated by the service using this facility? There is provision for the etag value being a version number or some similarly defined value. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk