Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Sat, 13 July 2013 22:41 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 03E5621F90FD for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 15:41:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=4.000, 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 EJ0xzh0XwqM7 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 15:41:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0118121F9C4E for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 15:41:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Uy8Up-0000ex-W5 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 22:40:56 +0000
Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 22:40:55 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Uy8Up-0000ex-W5@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>) id 1Uy8Ug-0000Yz-Cr for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 22:40:46 +0000
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([134.226.56.6]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>) id 1Uy8Ue-0007vG-TH for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 22:40:46 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FE45BEC0; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 23:40:22 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aJZaUwU5fjmr; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 23:40:21 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.87.48.9] (unknown [86.44.69.51]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4EFE1BE5D; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 23:40:21 +0100 (IST)
Message-ID: <51E1D753.8080807@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 23:40:19 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130623 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com>
CC: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Sam Pullara <spullara@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
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> <20130712125628.GC28893@1wt.eu> <22115082-53F8-433C-9497-755800803B93@checkpoint.com> <2101.1373699489@critter.freebsd.dk> <29B4ED34-8A7F-477F-AC80-47BC2205198F@checkpoint.com>
In-Reply-To: <29B4ED34-8A7F-477F-AC80-47BC2205198F@checkpoint.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: none client-ip=134.226.56.6; envelope-from=stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie; helo=mercury.scss.tcd.ie
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-3.450, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1Uy8Ue-0007vG-TH 1c7bec9d4a3a5559666b942066df2ff8
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/51E1D753.8080807@cs.tcd.ie>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18759
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>

Its a bit of a moot point I guess but...

On 07/13/2013 09:24 PM, Yoav Nir wrote:
> allow it to persist for as long as you want

I've always been amused that HTTP needs to be able to
manage state for decades. It'd be truly impressive if
a browser really managed state that lasts far longer
than the h/w on either side and probably also longer
than any piece of n/w kit in between.

If HTTP/2.0 were to impose an upper bound on cookie
lifetime of say, a session, that'd be good IMO. But I
guess that probably would be out of charter, even if
it'd be a good thing, as it'd break stuff. OTOH, it'd
arguably be a good thing to leave such stuff behind when
moving to HTTP/2.0.

Anyway, unless there's a groundswell of wg opinion that
cookies that expire in years are plain stupid and are
just not doing HTTP state management, I'll probably
shut up about it.

S.

PS: Yes, I know that forcing all cookies to be session
cookies would not be a panacea. Doesn't mean it wouldn't
be a good thing though.