IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Proposal: Cookie Priorities

Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se> Mon, 07 March 2016 12:44 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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2E501B4071 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 04:44:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.903
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 4lctxsFk7kEj for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 04:44:01 -0800 (PST)
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 BB1B11B4068 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 04:44:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1acuQS-00052H-NZ for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:38:16 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:38:16 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1acuQS-00052H-NZ@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <daniel@haxx.se>) id 1acuQM-00051R-Co for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:38:10 +0000
Received: from giant.haxx.se ([80.67.6.50] ident=root) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <daniel@haxx.se>) id 1acuQJ-0007Ar-W0 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:38:09 +0000
Received: from giant.haxx.se (dast@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by giant.haxx.se (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-3) with ESMTPS id u27CbfZh014762 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 7 Mar 2016 13:37:41 +0100
Received: from localhost (dast@localhost) by giant.haxx.se (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) with ESMTP id u27CbfqD014758; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 13:37:41 +0100
X-Authentication-Warning: giant.haxx.se: dast owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 13:37:41 +0100
From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
X-X-Sender: dast@giant.haxx.se
To: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>
cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Samuel Huang <huangs@google.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAKXHy=cY+i9mykHDH=MMMXGPTEGu4L6iwtEcXL55YJ_4sx9i_A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1603071332180.25615@tvnag.unkk.fr>
References: <CAKXHy=dvxE5f25_xx3mKTc+XRDU_Hp=uFDy-iL-_c0s+xHGydw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1603070855070.25615@tvnag.unkk.fr> <CAKXHy=fZkRnThojTU8V9s-Vyps8jG3xOTEF-yKrDs9cqh546mg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1603071033570.25615@tvnag.unkk.fr> <CAKXHy=fTSzgYJaj8P7HkofzKfhx-JEt8SJkxriz8dqmM99Tb_g@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1603071113470.25615@tvnag.unkk.fr> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1603071300010.25615@tvnag.unkk.fr> <CAKXHy=cY+i9mykHDH=MMMXGPTEGu4L6iwtEcXL55YJ_4sx9i_A@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
X-fromdanielhimself: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=80.67.6.50; envelope-from=daniel@haxx.se; helo=giant.haxx.se
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.2
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.010, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1acuQJ-0007Ar-W0 6bf612d94e695c8d5350575d6a9fe152
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Proposal: Cookie Priorities
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/alpine.DEB.2.20.1603071332180.25615@tvnag.unkk.fr>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/31218
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>

On Mon, 7 Mar 2016, Mike West wrote:

> I'm confused. Are there clients that process things in the reverse order
> from what RFC6265 lays out?

I'm sure there are several. The curl one just happens to be the one I know the 
best.

> I mean, according to the algorithm I quoted in the previous response, 
> `Priority=Low; favcolor=blue` _is_ a cookie named `Priority`. Just like 
> `Max-Age=1; favcolor=blue` is a cookie named `Max-Age` today. I think that's 
> the way browsers process cookies today. Does `curl` do things differently?

It does! It basically detects a set of names used for properties and treats 
the first unknown name value pair on the header as the cookie name, in a 
left-to-right order on the header.

(I'm not suggesting it is a "proper" or "good" implementation, just that it 
works with the vast majority of sites using cookies and it was written long 
before we created RFC 6265 and I guess nobody felt the need to update it since 
to that aspect.)

-- 

  / daniel.haxx.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email