Re: [http-state] Is this an omission in the parser rules of draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-21?

Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com> Tue, 15 February 2011 22:05 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 375473A6C75 for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:05:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.663
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.663 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.314, 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 Omwqir9YnKjz for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:05:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qy0-f179.google.com (mail-qy0-f179.google.com [209.85.216.179]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 169833A6AB9 for <http-state@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:05:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by qyj19 with SMTP id 19so527466qyj.10 for <http-state@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:05:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.224.73.200 with SMTP id r8mr1220906qaj.137.1297807533702; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:05:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g32sm2986198qck.10.2011.02.15.14.05.32 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:05:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by iwc10 with SMTP id 10so682873iwc.31 for <http-state@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:05:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.231.37.200 with SMTP id y8mr4383793ibd.105.1297807531815; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:05:31 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.215.67 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:05:01 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4D5AEE94.6010303@gmx.de>
References: <20110204184735.26023.qmail@mm01.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net> <AANLkTi=qBVkGwMHqAidtwP5_A8pPrF-Y9MV4jgYS5_QM@mail.gmail.com> <7384878F-C44A-42A4-9694-1BB1C18AA5E6@gbiv.com> <AANLkTinFq7bE_e3SSgdjuFvZ8hGn1xy4Hc1VKwc=vp1D@mail.gmail.com> <49225418-A1AF-4299-8C4F-2E608D34265D@gbiv.com> <AANLkTimrJF3LFR4t4j=U2L33kFh+wf-R=sjjwexcmyPi@mail.gmail.com> <26240DE2-4DD3-4863-81B1-635D34BA4AE4@gbiv.com> <AANLkTikzB=VORtn7xiG2JY8ymTjk4epC9huZTC-s0nzq@mail.gmail.com> <4D5AEE94.6010303@gmx.de>
From: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:05:01 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTimkmZ99qDcXB6=-PGtXq6WQ7+RSreRwsBAHryEj@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, http-state@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [http-state] Is this an omission in the parser rules of draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-21?
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, 15 Feb 2011 22:05:15 -0000

On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>; wrote:
> On 15.02.2011 22:11, Adam Barth wrote:
>> ...
>> You really think we should recommend that servers use invalid UTF-8
>> sequences as cookie-values?  That sounds like bad advice...
>> ...
>
> Could you elaborate? Is there client code out there that assumes cookie
> values to *be* UTF-8?

Regardless of what client code exist, surely servers are better off
avoiding non-ASCII characters in their cookie values.  Using non-ASCII
characters in HTTP headers is just asking for trouble.

Adam