Re: [http-state] http-state charter

Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> Tue, 04 August 2009 00:16 UTC

Return-Path: <ian@hixie.ch>
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 BA78C3A6DBD for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:16:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.766
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.766 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.167, 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 rYNvCYuIdL+L for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:16:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from looneymail-a2.g.dreamhost.com (caibbdcaaaaf.dreamhost.com [208.113.200.5]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E71293A6BFE for <http-state@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:16:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hixie.dreamhostps.com (hixie.dreamhost.com [208.113.210.27]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by looneymail-a2.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14EE716D43D; Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:16:27 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 00:16:26 +0000 (UTC)
From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
To: Dan Winship <dan.winship@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A777D12.5000106@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0908040015310.28566@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
References: <4A70D2D2.9050900@corry.biz> <4A731FCC.5040102@gmail.com> <4A735DD4.9040007@corry.biz> <4A777D12.5000106@gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-GB-hixie
Content-Style-Type: text/css
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: "http-state@ietf.org" <http-state@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [http-state] http-state charter
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: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 00:16:40 -0000

On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Dan Winship wrote:
>
> I am not an RFC expert (IANAIANA?) and am just basing this on what I've 
> absorbed through IETF mailing list osmosis, but there are various things 
> in the real-world-cookie spec that I imagine would result in it being 
> rejected as a standards-track RFC.

I think it's more important that we end up with an accurate spec than one 
that the IETF accepts.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'