Re: [http-state] A question about the parser test data

Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com> Fri, 08 April 2011 18:01 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@adambarth.com>
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 E1EAC3A6A07 for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 11:01:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.812
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.812 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.165, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 xgaqyBq93GpM for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 11:01:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1DC03A6A03 for <http-state@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 11:01:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qwc23 with SMTP id 23so2761902qwc.31 for <http-state@ietf.org>; Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.224.194.200 with SMTP id dz8mr2101129qab.227.1302285792977; Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:03:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qy0-f172.google.com (mail-qy0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c27sm2090292qck.46.2011.04.08.11.03.11 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qyk29 with SMTP id 29so9881qyk.10 for <http-state@ietf.org>; Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.224.201.130 with SMTP id fa2mr2082906qab.364.1302285791119; Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.224.6.79 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 11:02:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimipXDMrkfTA=aJ0UwKibEUR6vakA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimipXDMrkfTA=aJ0UwKibEUR6vakA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:02:41 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTinCjwwbo0Y=QgVS=5XV1apESYbGvA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chris Hanson <cph@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: http-state@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [http-state] A question about the parser test data
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: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 18:01:31 -0000

The test data isn't up to date with the final changes in the spec.  If
you'd be willing to send me the list of tests that don't match your
reading of the spec, I'll be happy to fix them.

Thanks,
Adam


On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Chris Hanson <cph@google.com> wrote:
> I've recently built a cookie implementation that's intended to be
> (eventually) compliant with draft-23.  As part of my testing, I
> gobbled up the test data from https://github.com/abarth/http-state/
> and have been running my set-cookie parser on it.
>
> I've been seeing some anomalies between what it specifies and what I
> expect based on my reading of the spec.
>
> Are these tests intended to be true for compliant implementations?  Or
> are they just true for current browsers, and not necessarily for
> compliant implementations?  I suspect the latter but would like
> confirmation; otherwise I may need some help understanding why my
> reading of the spec is incorrect.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> http-state mailing list
> http-state@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/http-state
>