Re: [http-state] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6265 (3765)

Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se> Sat, 26 October 2013 18:14 UTC

Return-Path: <daniel@haxx.se>
X-Original-To: http-state@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: http-state@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D283221F9E5A for <http-state@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 11:14:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qpfPNcrI56IW for <http-state@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 11:14:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from giant.haxx.se (www.haxx.se [IPv6:2a00:1a28:1200:9::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B268B11E819F for <http-state@ietf.org>; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 11:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from giant.haxx.se (dast@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by giant.haxx.se (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1) with ESMTP id r9QIE5bX009861 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 26 Oct 2013 20:14:05 +0200
Received: from localhost (dast@localhost) by giant.haxx.se (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) with ESMTP id r9QIE39I009839; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 20:14:03 +0200
X-Authentication-Warning: giant.haxx.se: dast owned process doing -bs
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 20:14:03 +0200 (CEST)
From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
X-X-Sender: dast@giant.haxx.se
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJKiRQaDoMnePDHCZMNixMHO_8_WZ8wV-O2KG3fJWkvoNg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1310262013110.15605@tvnag.unkk.fr>
References: <20131026072908.37CBE726001@rfc-editor.org> <CALaySJKiRQaDoMnePDHCZMNixMHO_8_WZ8wV-O2KG3fJWkvoNg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
X-fromdanielhimself: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: "info@firmen.jknaupp.de" <info@firmen.jknaupp.de>, "presnick@qti.qualcomm.com" <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, "http-state@ietf.org" <http-state@ietf.org>, "abarth@eecs.berkeley.edu" <abarth@eecs.berkeley.edu>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Subject: Re: [http-state] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6265 (3765)
X-BeenThere: http-state@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discuss HTTP State Management Mechanism <http-state.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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, 26 Oct 2013 18:14:28 -0000

On Sat, 26 Oct 2013, Barry Leiba wrote:

>> The spec says what it says on purpose. Changing the text as suggested
>> would break the cookie system.
>
> Indeed.  In particular, we know that 6265 doesn't always match up with
> 2616, because it's documenting how cookies are used, and the usage isn't
> always strictly correct.
>
> I'll mark this one "rejected" for that reason.

Not that it is needed, but I agree with this. The complaint was completely 
wrong.

-- 

  / daniel.haxx.se