Re: [http-state] Whether to recommend the cookie protocol (was Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-04.txt)

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Thu, 25 February 2010 00:03 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: http-state@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: http-state@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A38028C28F for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:03:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.595
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.595 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.004, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yt-gSm+0duFA for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:03:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stpeter.im (stpeter.im [207.210.219.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25C9228C16B for <http-state@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:03:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-64-101-72-201.cisco.com (dhcp-64-101-72-201.cisco.com [64.101.72.201]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5707F40332; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 17:05:20 -0700 (MST)
Message-ID: <4B85BEBF.50806@stpeter.im>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 17:05:19 -0700
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
References: <5c4444771002231855s36391fdfgd30a1ebc57722915@mail.gmail.com> <4B84A55E.6000304@stpeter.im> <5c4444771002232011x7ef1a15dj23a5b58357915fa6@mail.gmail.com> <4B85BBA6.7040604@stpeter.im> <5c4444771002241604p79cc80beo721a1366562434cb@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5c4444771002241604p79cc80beo721a1366562434cb@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1
OpenPGP: url=http://www.saint-andre.com/me/stpeter.asc
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms030505090809000700050102"
Cc: http-state@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [http-state] Whether to recommend the cookie protocol (was Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-04.txt)
X-BeenThere: http-state@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discuss HTTP State Management Mechanism <http-state.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/http-state>, <mailto:http-state-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/http-state>
List-Post: <mailto:http-state@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:http-state-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/http-state>, <mailto:http-state-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 00:03:15 -0000

On 2/24/10 5:04 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
> I didn't understand very much of your message, probably because I'm
> ignorant of the relevant technologies and their associated social
> conventions.  In any case, the subject is moot because the text you're
> arguing against has been removed.

Well that's even clearer, then. :)

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/