IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Call for Adoption: Cookie Incrementalism

David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org> Fri, 13 November 2020 16:02 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 C26713A0E48 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 08:02:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.748
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.748 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org
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 S5SY5_La1B7a for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 08:02:34 -0800 (PST)
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 189863A0E46 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 08:02:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1kdbUb-0003Ou-Gx for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:00:05 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:00:05 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1kdbUb-0003Ou-Gx@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 <davidben@google.com>) id 1kdbUa-0003O8-Mx for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:00:04 +0000
Received: from mail-pg1-x52b.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::52b]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <davidben@google.com>) id 1kdbUY-0001l3-9s for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:00:04 +0000
Received: by mail-pg1-x52b.google.com with SMTP id h6so7412678pgk.4 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 08:00:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=4Gf5QJnEFLwUCjgzdyqw2EegrIDnAdoimPCo7tuWADw=; b=fp5XujOVUY78VJ1d9OdUtnXYO9x0C9WDkzrcpklTNC8najcWd4qieat2Q3bpn6tmw0 fLHVygxTd8OTDjR2h7a9KaK9lpEDPrhZ99zdmXhaaPydTkX2W2OJK0M/A9ooEbo3/lRw NJc0aAVcA+UUT06skKeA2WxmeTg9UD+ORd/OA=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=4Gf5QJnEFLwUCjgzdyqw2EegrIDnAdoimPCo7tuWADw=; b=MLIoa8hSGR7Io169BMyHqbr/9yGvFZoEC9uTXBTqSi3btnYbnGW10Ctt459TKeD+gf 9j0i/70Do3tfT34cPOnm7fOQJtL1e7oNtCHqJEk2TqqROSwM8ScClLDwPJ05sdSLS3pU DB9EH+PnU3XmpSZ4WZjVRM18tCuRoSmmmEYDxx0CVWaDSnn8bQHxKiwWq3JTbK4wul6f td8VpPqMdpcB8kXmVTHrzwu1lA+YXnMY7mTTg0VtRh61ScdVz3YPqw4OOMpd4oxhJu+u y89+ploBWMgKpmrDJsfe15FX6VWXYxRudlNrqzHmA+d49HMIbeY/9cthSS8OX1+fN138 L8nA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531yvemC0w+MUS4dgNx6U6zAG0l5voB/LWFhjRKOgJMsV5lSmXpX JV42z4nu3OXlbtdkSi6PW+K6oYV5Ahakfj+2GIBD6bjR5w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxSHKqrVKno+rcJ3rD08nyCbFVg0kVQiUA99UQvNVTaEjnE1Zl5cdEGPpHe2Z4yEoDILHtr41XW8qdbMOKiDkQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1011:: with SMTP id gm17mr3556009pjb.73.1605283184311; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 07:59:44 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BE51D899-1C82-4E3A-A035-FD079CCBE333@mnot.net> <0fa5e1c1-51ad-3ef3-8937-303f565e7912@treenet.co.nz> <CAE24OxzYKz=AbSHMJHK9jdy9XZ+GUYC55Kj9-EmihHCfcCT4Ug@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAE24OxzYKz=AbSHMJHK9jdy9XZ+GUYC55Kj9-EmihHCfcCT4Ug@mail.gmail.com>
From: David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:59:28 -0500
Message-ID: <CAF8qwaBMYkAgtf_P2rfgbYW=DgWFe5pGuQmK=w=N3_OnbmQCJg@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f74bd705b3ff1d62"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::52b; envelope-from=davidben@google.com; helo=mail-pg1-x52b.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.2
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1kdbUY-0001l3-9s 64465908210ffc4767588765399c28ba
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Call for Adoption: Cookie Incrementalism
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CAF8qwaBMYkAgtf_P2rfgbYW=DgWFe5pGuQmK=w=N3_OnbmQCJg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/38220
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>

I support adoption.

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 10:54 AM Lily Chen <chlily@google.com> wrote:

> I support adoption.
>
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 2:58 AM Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
> wrote:
>
>> On 13/11/20 12:45 pm, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> > Those with good memories will recall that when we started RFC6265bis,
>> we required significant changes to the specification to be backed by a
>> separate I-D, so that we could judge consensus and implementation support
>> for it separately. See:
>> >
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2015OctDec/0165.html
>> >
>> > In the spirit of that, we have one more proposal for consideration:
>> >    https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-west-cookie-incrementalism-01
>> >
>> > Parts of this were discussed at the recent interim:
>> >    https://httpwg.org/wg-materials/interim-20-10/rfc6265bis.pdf#page=3
>> >
>> > Other parts (e.g., s 3.4-3.6) may need more discussion; if we adopt the
>> draft, we may decide that they aren't worth pursuing, but by default we'd
>> spend some time discussing them.
>> >
>> > Please comment on whether you support adoption of this document into
>> RFC6265bis. In particular, we're looking for implementer feedback because
>> -- as before -- our goal for this effort is to be closely aligned with
>> implementation behaviour.
>> >
>> > The Call for Adoption will run until 27 November.
>> >
>> > - Mark and Tommy
>> >
>>
>>
>> I support adoption.
>>
>>
>> Amos
>>
>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email