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

Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> Sun, 24 January 2010 04:48 UTC

Return-Path: <mjs@apple.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 B7ADE3A67F6 for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:48:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 Ggoz0tJbAyk5 for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:48:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-out3.apple.com (mail-out3.apple.com [17.254.13.22]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 117CF3A6784 for <http-state@ietf.org>; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:48:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay15.apple.com (relay15.apple.com [17.128.113.54]) by mail-out3.apple.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED785818E3BD for <http-state@ietf.org>; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:48:34 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 11807136-b7bafae000000e8d-0e-4b5bd1223748
Received: from et.apple.com (et.apple.com [17.151.62.12]) by relay15.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id 5F.F0.03725.221DB5B4; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:48:34 -0800 (PST)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Received: from [17.151.83.23] by et.apple.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.04 (built Sep 26 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPSA id <0KWQ00KGJIOYV900@et.apple.com> for http-state@ietf.org; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:48:34 -0800 (PST)
From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
In-reply-to: <7789133a1001191410l48530adar28098a03e6de0fb1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:48:33 -0800
Message-id: <FAF9D4AD-CC18-4492-8500-7DB20A53EF61@apple.com>
References: <7789133a1001191410l48530adar28098a03e6de0fb1@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAZE=
Cc: http-state <http-state@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [http-state] Ticket 5: Cookie ordering
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: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 04:48:34 -0000

On Jan 19, 2010, at 2:10 PM, 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.)

That would be useful information. For the browsers that don't follow this behavior, I'd also like to know how they differ. It sounds like not specifying the order at all isn't viable, so I'd like to understand the tradeoffs between fully specifying it and partially specifying it in various ways.

Regards,
Maciej