Re: cookie-radius / http-equiv="cookie"
Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> Sun, 24 October 2021 14:05 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@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 83F643A14A4 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 07:05:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, NICE_REPLY_A=-3.33, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5iNS5Al_vqlN for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 07:05:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D00F3A149A for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 07:05:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1meZ1z-0006YN-IV for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 08:39:03 +0000
Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2021 08:39:03 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1meZ1z-0006YN-IV@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <squid3@treenet.co.nz>) id 1meZ1x-0006WQ-3H for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 08:39:01 +0000
Received: from [101.98.39.247] (helo=treenet.co.nz) by titan.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <squid3@treenet.co.nz>) id 1meZ1v-0003Uy-6G for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 08:39:00 +0000
Received: from [10.1.1.16] (unknown [10.1.1.16]) by treenet.co.nz (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4D9C6300232 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 21:38:38 +1300 (NZDT)
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
References: <71e434cf-8e20-246a-5a21-f161710363bd@ztk-rp.eu>
From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Message-ID: <bdae5cc6-4f4f-d5c9-467f-13cbafb0b10c@treenet.co.nz>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2021 21:32:23 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <71e434cf-8e20-246a-5a21-f161710363bd@ztk-rp.eu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=101.98.39.247; envelope-from=squid3@treenet.co.nz; helo=treenet.co.nz
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-3.33, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1meZ1v-0003Uy-6G 56957083e6cc18447623144ffc49d1be
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: cookie-radius / http-equiv="cookie"
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/bdae5cc6-4f4f-d5c9-467f-13cbafb0b10c@treenet.co.nz>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/39509
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: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
On 13/10/21 8:38 pm, Rafal Pietrak wrote: > Dear Everybody, > > Some time ago I've drafted a proposal for cookie-radius > (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pietrak-cookie-scope/). This was > not received well, so I've decided not to press the matter. > > But, since then I've learned, that there is a (currently depreciated) > http-equiv.set-cookie <meta> tag attribute. Since this was implemented > in most browsers, may be an improved definition of it's semantics could > make it useful again. > Please be aware that "http-equiv" META are expected to cause the Browser the same behaviour as if the key name (here "set-cookie") was a received HTTP header. So your proposal needs to be made to change RFC 6265 as changes to the Set-Cookie and Cookie headers themselves. Amos
- cookie-radius / http-equiv="cookie" Rafal Pietrak
- Re: cookie-radius / http-equiv="cookie" Amos Jeffries
- Re: cookie-radius / http-equiv="cookie" Rafal Pietrak