Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Fri, 19 July 2013 18:08 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 685EE11E817C for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.408
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.408 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=3.569, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xy+hOYqkXVBB for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:08:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD10411E8142 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1V0F57-0000Th-An for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 18:07:05 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 18:07:05 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1V0F57-0000Th-An@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <nico@cryptonector.com>) id 1V0F4y-0000Qc-Nn for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 18:06:56 +0000
Received: from caiajhbdcagg.dreamhost.com ([208.97.132.66] helo=homiemail-a96.g.dreamhost.com) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <nico@cryptonector.com>) id 1V0F4x-0000O6-Qf for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 18:06:56 +0000
Received: from homiemail-a96.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a96.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D433B805C for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=ejnhL1Dz0kXnCtpdAi2s oNRaIuE=; b=JwfjPui1xdaLJb9ETZoLZB06GRMC2KMPMPlGDOmod+liA4YjtUUr xneXfTVqeRkiXon7vbrm3mSaeu8J5vNzm+e+skKyIIORdu7bBUXQOHlPx521kNut mXkBPExlLNy5nRHhb5NIb+xr5RFGGwBXHZHAwg5bOv1GYYLIDG1tMXs=
Received: from mail-wg0-f41.google.com (mail-wg0-f41.google.com [74.125.82.41]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a96.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 78C783B805B for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f41.google.com with SMTP id y10so800096wgg.4 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:06:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=6+Cn5IFk7EoE63957Hhc1+VqKAIAURfjLG+QaK6TXvE=; b=C2T+XcJ1PaCsvrtXimZa43NVtQo+/Cb5n+wYrJjlWLwCk/uU0PpLV3RCcjSDiYC/mX PTDS8N0e/aV/dsV2v0A+6W5jufHJGEoKGjfrXhaQVYom8+CT3rwc8ARQnmb9nxS0pI0l l1gp7F5V5drQoqSDTzHLUWEZyFLUpJCO4aI9iVsALvtD/yaxxEFvIz/EVvFVUdQVykeS dtk/nkNMhJ8moR672BgHRpBWtoufTFv8BSLQhjWuRmCuzMRY1aE7L621kG1wcI2DXORv MnS3k6/k9oX34/KJVxdd6AjLdRxhmmycvZHrfbfHE3s8JieZP/1hpRVgN8XcLZqlXagc SPsA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.185.176 with SMTP id fd16mr12326064wic.20.1374257192912; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:06:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.217.38.138 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:06:32 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6633.1374254534@critter.freebsd.dk>
References: <CA+qvzFPUpcm6kUtJx+rTw8Dpp4Gtx4Bmr3XPDhjNsjchUfN9_w@mail.gmail.com> <51DE1E32.9010801@treenet.co.nz> <CAP+FsNdcYhA=V5Z+zbt70b5e7WmcmXgjG5M9L3vfXeXfTwmRnw@mail.gmail.com> <51DE327C.7010901@treenet.co.nz> <CABkgnnXeqD6wh0dcJ1Dz=4PLAJNkDeGcCuzMr9ATd_7xS7nbGQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7RbcUkLf3CTAB4jwicnsiKWLGVY6=hX0k=0256SR_gcVt9A@mail.gmail.com> <092D65A8-8CB7-419D-B6A4-77CAE40A0026@gmail.com> <3835.1373612286@critter.freebsd.dk> <CD9E163F-1225-4DA8-9982-8BDBD16B1051@mnot.net> <1772.1373629495@critter.freebsd.dk> <CAK3OfOiRTw9CMVw88eW1G95t0hx0ZfGitHw2Co4bV-fN2dnv7g@mail.gmail.com> <6633.1374254534@critter.freebsd.dk>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 13:06:32 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOjSjPXZhA5TvTn8nuJgu9V_wGE81LRz5axfFuifjymj7w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Sam Pullara <spullara@gmail.com>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: none client-ip=208.97.132.66; envelope-from=nico@cryptonector.com; helo=homiemail-a96.g.dreamhost.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-3.449, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1V0F4x-0000O6-Qf b893976092a15c2ae9f6dc3f5b159e09
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAK3OfOjSjPXZhA5TvTn8nuJgu9V_wGE81LRz5axfFuifjymj7w@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18850
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> In message <CAK3OfOiRTw9CMVw88eW1G95t0hx0ZfGitHw2Co4bV-fN2dnv7g@mail.gmail.com>
> , Nico Williams writes:
>>On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
>>> I have given a concrete example multiple times, it's very simple:
>>
>>So you think all session state should always be stored on the server, period?
>>
>>It's hard to disagree, but I was under the impression that many
>>services need to be stateless (storing session state in encrypted
>>cookies) for various reasons.
>
> In the post-EU-regulation, post-PRISM-world, "various reasons" need
> to be "Very Good Reasons" for this practice to continue.

I'm not sure how any session identifier would survive silly
anti-cookie regulations from the EU.  A session ID is still a cookie.

I don't see how PRISM affects this either.  If anything, keeping
session state on the server... only helps PRISM: more data to chomp
on.