Re: Editorial Issue: Persisted Settings... when does the client need to return them?

James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Sat, 27 April 2013 03:40 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 7AD2321F99F3 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 20:40:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.374
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.374 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.225, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 e9DdBNrDcwUD for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 20:40:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDC5221F9983 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 20:40:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UVvzT-0006Wo-JS for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 03:39:59 +0000
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 03:39:59 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UVvzT-0006Wo-JS@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1UVvzK-0006VV-QL for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 03:39:50 +0000
Received: from mail-ob0-f178.google.com ([209.85.214.178]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1UVvzK-0002Wc-7y for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 03:39:50 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f178.google.com with SMTP id 16so4038847obc.23 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 20:39:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=zSkfB8mw+tWjfcnnB3WFA9ygJN/b3EL6B1zpf2ltbQg=; b=p6AX3DQBmJbugCvdHeZqaILfCenoQ+u4ZBLzr9HzSgtieENsoJeGs31uGBFihu0Jk0 kU2MCqE0+jv+dHMebcrX+gvFJ5kRLoL6c8L3R+ov8jYSDsviQrxw1ecSPIDERhXxn0PY bFc2Nx4JOM+38LZh3W2F6QhEYeh/GXnjPtr0BxBXRWKxTftUgYA72xxFvjt5NhW8Q+OA HyEzgFtBWpxQYNvh2YgjaPK3DmM0ExVPjUcuGRzTkyx3b+c2cMmJGSiRXKn5R3AV7ZvP jEuAfDK6jGNuCNvgOtbAO/RIDKSn1xix3zxtiTXoqHKKUXtKvIyR2c8j+fJEZOjUNOIZ opGA==
X-Received: by 10.60.76.234 with SMTP id n10mr24738339oew.63.1367033964256; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 20:39:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.3.137 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 20:39:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnXc2aw43aXMDM7oXoDcgDs3+03qwYfw6Sobz_tbMh_diA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABP7Rbcyf2FQH50OC1EgTr5+So_4tisVNZKOUBvKDe=fRgMbxA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXc2aw43aXMDM7oXoDcgDs3+03qwYfw6Sobz_tbMh_diA@mail.gmail.com>
From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 20:39:04 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbfRdi6eH-AXp57Pa1-m1c_9ZN3Xa+7E2RihdezX24WYpQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.214.178; envelope-from=jasnell@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f178.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.605, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1UVvzK-0002Wc-7y 9b6520978aa525971ba77818d20a2962
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Editorial Issue: Persisted Settings... when does the client need to return them?
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABP7RbfRdi6eH-AXp57Pa1-m1c_9ZN3Xa+7E2RihdezX24WYpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17630
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>

To be honest, the whole persistent settings thing gives me the
willies, particularly given that SETTINGS as defined currently are
generally specific to individual connections. If I'm on the road and
on my phone connected temporarily to a free wifi access point, I don't
necessarily want that access point being able to tell my phone to
persistently store some piece of data that will never be used anywhere
else... Not to mention the inherent privacy concerns...

On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 8:06 PM, Martin Thomson
<martin.thomson@gmail.com>; wrote:
> Given that persisted settings are at risk, I think that we can defer
> addressing this one.
>
> (I'd say that once is enough and that persisted settings need only be
> returned at connection establishment time, but that's not the only
> thing we need to address with persistent settings, I think.)
>
> On 26 April 2013 14:28, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>; wrote:
>> One bit that's not clear in the current draft...
>>
>> When the server asks the client to persist a setting, is the client
>> required to return that setting in EVERY subsequent SETTINGS frame it
>> sends to the server until the setting is cleared or is it only
>> required to send the persisted settings once when a new session is
>> established (i.e. in the client session header?)
>>