Re: [http-state] Is this an omission in the parser rules of draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-21?

"Remy Lebeau" <remy@lebeausoftware.org> Sat, 05 February 2011 10:09 UTC

Return-Path: <remy@lebeausoftware.org>
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 55D963A69AE for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Feb 2011 02:09:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.849, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152]
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 O6w9DbWzVjLu for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Feb 2011 02:09:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpoutwbe07.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (smtpoutwbe07.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net [208.109.78.209]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9A0CB3A68DF for <http-state@ietf.org>; Sat, 5 Feb 2011 02:09:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 10377 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2011 10:12:27 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO gem-wbe06.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net) (64.202.189.38) by smtpoutwbe07.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net with SMTP; 5 Feb 2011 10:12:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 26644 invoked by uid 99); 5 Feb 2011 10:12:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-Originating-IP: 76.93.119.83
User-Agent: Web-Based Email 5.3.08
Message-Id: <20110205031227.f00013ceab8fb1928885c5c172fbfd4a.078b7e26ba.wbe@email00.secureserver.net>
From: "Remy Lebeau" <remy@lebeausoftware.org>
To: "Adam Barth" <ietf@adambarth.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 03:12:27 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Cc: http-state@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [http-state] =?utf-8?q?Is_this_an_omission_in_the_parser_rules_of?= =?utf-8?q?_draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-21=3F?=
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: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 10:09:02 -0000

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [http-state] Is this an omission in the parser rules of
draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-21?
From: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>;
Date: Sat, February 05, 2011 1:49 am
To: Remy Lebeau <remy@lebeausoftware.org>;
Cc: http-state@ietf.org

> I haven't gone through your example in detail, but you're correct
> that the " character at the beginning of the Path attribute causes
> the user agent to never return the cookie.

Quotes around the Path attribute MAY allow the cookie to be returned,
depending on which default-path is retreived.  Quotes around the Domain
attribute, on the other hand, WILL NOT allow the cookie to be returned.

> You're welcome to test implementations.

Thanks for the link, that is exactly the kind of test data I have been
looking for lately.  I'll run the examples through my implementation
when I get a chance.