Bug 1958245 Comment 2 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

Original comment by
on 
The new RFC explicitly [says](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110#section-16.2.2-6) that any response with a final status code can be cached if the response has explicit freshness information.

Since 303 is a final status code the response has freshness information (`expires` and `max-age`), Chrome complies with the latest RFC.
Revision 1 by
on 
The new RFC explicitly [says](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110#section-16.2.2-6) that any response with a final status code can be cached if the response has explicit freshness information.

Since 303 is a final status code and the response has freshness information (`expires` and `max-age`), Chrome complies with the latest RFC.
Revision 2 by
on 
The new RFC explicitly [says](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110#section-16.2.2-6) that any response with a final status code can be cached if the response has explicit freshness information.

Since 303 is a final status code and the response has freshness information (`expires` and `max-age`), Chrome complies with the latest RFC.
RFC 9111 has [more detailed conditions](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9111.html#name-storing-responses-in-caches).

Back to Bug 1958245 Comment 2