IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [http-state] I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-04.txt

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 23 February 2010 17:19 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
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 E687328C577 for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 09:19:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.467
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.467 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.868, 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 fuqVr2pzmUD1 for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 09:19:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C63CA28C572 for <http-state@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 09:19:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 23 Feb 2010 17:15:03 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.105]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp068) with SMTP; 23 Feb 2010 18:15:03 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX185zQ0gIk056VcYLiybRDTTbeAF3ff0OXUZ6K7Vuf f5QIezeO1L4Bx7
Message-ID: <4B840D10.6090407@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 18:14:56 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060516 Thunderbird/1.5.0.4 Mnenhy/0.7.4.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
References: <20100223161504.7E9D128C1C6@core3.amsl.com> <op.u8lba0ze64w2qv@annevk-t60>
In-Reply-To: <op.u8lba0ze64w2qv@annevk-t60>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-FuHaFi: 0.64000000000000001
Cc: http-state@ietf.org, Internet-Drafts@ietf.org, i-d-announce@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [http-state] I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-04.txt
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, 23 Feb 2010 17:19:42 -0000

On 23.02.2010 18:10, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:15:04 +0100, <Internet-Drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>> The cookie protocol has many
>> historical infelicities and should be avoided for new applications of
>> HTTP.
>
> What exactly does this mean? There's no suitable replacement for cookies
> available currently so giving this advice seems a bit premature, but
> maybe I misunderstand what it says.

It also says in 7.1:

"The cookie protocol is NOT RECOMMENDED for new applications."

BR, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email