Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis-00.txt

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Tue, 11 October 2016 04:05 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 297DD129460 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 21:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.917
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 CjVj4RmFEiPr for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 21:05:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DBFF1295CB for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 21:05:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1btoGU-0006he-AD for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 04:02:06 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 04:02:06 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1btoGU-0006he-AD@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1btoGQ-0006gv-Qb for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 04:02:02 +0000
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net ([216.86.168.182]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1btoGC-0003U2-Ke for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 04:01:55 +0000
Received: from [192.168.3.104] (unknown [124.189.98.244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 76F1122E25B for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 00:01:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.0 \(3226\))
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 15:01:21 +1100
References: <147614675047.31404.6416168532325888959.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In-Reply-To: <147614675047.31404.6416168532325888959.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Message-Id: <32B08A40-38CC-4B62-9ABC-CEC402D3C02D@mnot.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3226)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.182; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-07.mxes.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.351, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1btoGC-0003U2-Ke 5915a1e4a4b618b861da9759bd3273d5
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis-00.txt
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/32B08A40-38CC-4B62-9ABC-CEC402D3C02D@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32546
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>

Hi Everyone,

This is the -00 draft, which is pretty much a direct copy of RFC6265 (with some formatting changes, mostly caused by the tools themselves).

Mike will soon start incorporating the drafts we've taken on board, to see how they look in situ.

Cheers,


> On 11 Oct. 2016, at 11:45 am, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> 
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol of the IETF.
> 
>        Title           : HTTP State Management Mechanism
>        Authors         : Adam Barth
>                          Mike West
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis-00.txt
> 	Pages           : 35
> 	Date            : 2016-10-10
> 
> Abstract:
>   This document defines the HTTP Cookie and Set-Cookie header fields.
>   These header fields can be used by HTTP servers to store state
>   (called cookies) at HTTP user agents, letting the servers maintain a
>   stateful session over the mostly stateless HTTP protocol.  Although
>   cookies have many historical infelicities that degrade their security
>   and privacy, the Cookie and Set-Cookie header fields are widely used
>   on the Internet.  This document obsoletes RFC 2965.
> 
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis/
> 
> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis-00
> 
> 
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> 
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/