IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [http-state] Welcome to http-state

Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se> Mon, 12 January 2009 22:54 UTC

Return-Path: <http-state-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: http-state-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-http-state-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D2B83A6903; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:54:26 -0800 (PST)
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 573223A6903 for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:54:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.532
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.283, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35]
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 AeDur6NOG2nA for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:54:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from kluster1.contactor.se (kluster1.contactor.se [91.191.140.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B13783A67C0 for <http-state@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:54:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from linux3.contactor.se (linux3.contactor.se [91.191.140.23]) by kluster1.contactor.se (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id n0CMs7BX021257 for <http-state@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 23:54:07 +0100
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 23:54:07 +0100
From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
X-X-Sender: dast@linux3.contactor.se
To: Discuss HTTP State Management Mechanism <http-state@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <496BC8A4.4080008@corry.biz>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.00.0901122350210.2812@yvahk3.pbagnpgbe.fr>
References: <49679299.6060703@corry.biz> <120206B6A348CA498C70E738A2E963514C0CCC@Nexus.cisecurity.lan> <7789133a0901121159u1da01de8w77edd52913857358@mail.gmail.com> <120206B6A348CA498C70E738A2E963514C0CD2@Nexus.cisecurity.lan> <7789133a0901121359p635972bod78e7a46a29c1a8b@mail.gmail.com> <496BC8A4.4080008@corry.biz>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LRH 1167 2008-08-23)
X-fromdanielhimself: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [http-state] Welcome to http-state
X-BeenThere: http-state@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Discuss HTTP State Management Mechanism <http-state@ietf.org>
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/pipermail/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>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: http-state-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: http-state-bounces@ietf.org

On Mon, 12 Jan 2009, Bil Corry wrote:

> Of course, we're reworking the cookie spec, so presumably we can choose a 
> better method (which may be the Cookie-Integrity header).

Personally I would like to see this effort produce a document for the current 
cookie practises. Clearly new cookie specs have a very hard time to get 
accepted so just starting a third or forth cookie spec that nobody will adopt 
isn't very useful. IMHO.

> Because of the limited deployment of Cookie2, I'd imagine any backwards 
> compatibility problems would be also limited.

If a new spec is being written anyway, why re-use something that can cause 
problems? In fact, it wouldn't even have to use the name 'cookie' but could 
just as well use 'state' or something else.

-- 

  / daniel.haxx.se
_______________________________________________
http-state mailing list
http-state@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/http-state

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email