Re: [http-state] Ticket 5: Cookie ordering

[David Morris <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, Adam Barth wrote:

> Ticket 3 is still open for discussion, but I'd like to get started
> talking the next ticket:
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpstate/trac/ticket/5
>
> == Overview ==
>
> Currently the draft defines the order in which cookies should appear
> in the Cookie header.  In particular, cookies are ordered first by the
> length of the Path attribute (longest first) and then by creation date
> (earliest first).  The majority of the most widely used user agents
> use this ordering. (I can look up exactly which browsers follow the
> ordering if that's important.)
>
> Sending cookies with longer (i.e., more specific) paths first is
> important for compatibly because some servers host multiple (mutually
> trusting) web applications at different (possibly overlapping) paths.

I think 'longer' is not a precise term ... likewise, 'more specific' isn't
precise enough to avoid confusion. I think what would be expected is that
the path sith the most 'levels' (as noted by '/' characters) is longer in 
a deeper into the hierarachy sense. Same depth, the age rule could apply.

If 'more specific' is already defined similar to what I've outlined,
you can igore this comment.

Dave Morris