IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Call for Adoption: Cookie Incrementalism

Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com> Fri, 13 November 2020 00:08 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 9151D3A10EA for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:08:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.248
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-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_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
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 muifjJtzpZ5M for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:08:54 -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 DFA163A10E7 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:08:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1kdMdr-0008VR-LP for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 00:08:39 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 00:08:39 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1kdMdr-0008VR-LP@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 <ianswett@google.com>) id 1kdMdq-0008Sd-PS for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 00:08:38 +0000
Received: from mail-yb1-xb2f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2f]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ianswett@google.com>) id 1kdMdp-0005Ad-0r for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 00:08:38 +0000
Received: by mail-yb1-xb2f.google.com with SMTP id c18so7061242ybj.10 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:08:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ibIeGb83deI/hEDa8DUJNjzZ9SxOxn9PL7HchmPaPBU=; b=uN4cQrFS6WsCuRGk23OikHtEmGRRwGQS9DbwXFI1iMeYXqsHB2Q/4nNGjuH3Fgwhox WEvnaV3KBisOhypH+4Qy8cQcdeeTh9IWwW1hBGrhg0ZPZU5MqZ4JbN+kyegCXZsLVhNF 9Z2h+yNNzKROQkNfsKV+UFa4d2c1Wn1nx8YDttXDRWbKHeGVhFUsAMuhdvKo/g7MjYwO TcoNSXrO770fWREGfniw6u1+1SgZnps1CjuE9lSpZFus1H6uSB1VVxBUh3diQGRsgbt4 jENSop1O0Cw9VmysfLTKGIOw/87MdUh0Iv13X7dHB5qE3nSTUaJesNDshQwnmj+UagQV NnVg==
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:cc; bh=ibIeGb83deI/hEDa8DUJNjzZ9SxOxn9PL7HchmPaPBU=; b=nl3pF4XI6tbsodQeX9mpwhemtMhGLeGTd+sCfBpE2KJnQCGD6QZ8xRnl1NekVMtJNL Z4GJpFUojnkIqf8CfsAPpBNKIUAh3rfE/W9tlrs7xEODmV9Je0GZe1s8vh2afb5Hwp+I 61W/iXkeKuQnaihvmaToP2nE7ZkvM01JYUpdOtzeOAuRy/K4BhhqvOaFIdDRU8ny4u/n QrKQJ91YzNpZpFJAUKCkYcOxbb9wZ0+o8nHf2lWj/FUywjgP5d42v8cZAWXpW2MGU26a 0wHAddZ5w/Is05aNBxhAxj2TSonjvgHfytZOMbDya3JgAnqWfPYbuIci8+4xIpyXtYjF BY0w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533bJTO7ApNY/X1ydV16EOc3Qq/raLqG9Xnxw7mt6SyHkNg1Wnh6 02JjFLt8JpUM6477xY/O4gs0FBKRM07r/Ss16LiV2Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwRD9E+4H8dloDpuUCAyXkOhnimxj/D4MB3lMj6o8B+8/qgSgdPCMjSneaYpGgEdHlj5eN9yTSdGmCi7zpi0C4=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:dc0f:: with SMTP id y15mr2959078ybe.494.1605226105817; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:08:25 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BE51D899-1C82-4E3A-A035-FD079CCBE333@mnot.net> <CALjsk17vzDyvRrAaLHVV1wjDjYktnsf2J-QaDdeFsi9aUsE=BA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALjsk17vzDyvRrAaLHVV1wjDjYktnsf2J-QaDdeFsi9aUsE=BA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:14 -0500
Message-ID: <CAKcm_gOFYckAmPKh8E1YP+pbxwTF4UwOie3xOgWgACZEC4TWiA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Lassey <lassey@google.com>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Tommy Pauly <tpauly=40apple.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d2bf0405b3f1d362"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2f; envelope-from=ianswett@google.com; helo=mail-yb1-xb2f.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-19.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1kdMdp-0005Ad-0r 1209fefba733362325a3939a304eb390
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Call for Adoption: Cookie Incrementalism
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CAKcm_gOFYckAmPKh8E1YP+pbxwTF4UwOie3xOgWgACZEC4TWiA@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/38212
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 also support adoption.

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 7:05 PM Brad Lassey <lassey@google.com> wrote:

> I support adoption
>
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 6:49 PM Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> 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
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email