Re: RFC2109 addition...

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org: "I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-http-pep-02.txt"
• Previous message: Dave Kristol: "Re: Section 10.1.1 Combining Set-Cookie and Set-Cookie2"
• Maybe in reply to: Jonathan Stark: "RFC2109 addition..."
• Next in thread: Larry Masinter: "Re: RFC2109 addition..."

> > > > CommentURL=commenturl
> > >
> > > How about
> > >   CommentURL = '<' commenturl '>'
> >
> > I'm new to this whole process, so I guess I don't understand the
> > difference in notation.  Does this now imply that the attributeline would
> > look like this:
> >       CommentURL=<http://www.privacy.net/disclosure>
> > ?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > If so, I disagree.  It should be parsed the same as all the other
> > attributes...
> >       CommentURL=http://www.privacy.net/disclosure
> > However you notate that.... :)  I'm not sure... are there problems
> > with escaped characters in a URL meaning something in the Cookie?
> 
> Yes, Set-Cookie2 accepts a comma-separated list of cookies.  Since some
> sites (the c|net sites come to mind) use commas in URLs, we would need to
> protect the URL commas from interpretation.  This would add a little
> complexity to URL-parsing.

I don't think '<' and '>' improve the situation.  The general description of
values says they can be "-enclosed.  So a URL with special characters like ','
could be quoted.  (See my similar remarks about port-list for Port=.)  There's
no need to add <>.

Dave Kristol

• Next message: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org: "I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-http-pep-02.txt"
• Previous message: Dave Kristol: "Re: Section 10.1.1 Combining Set-Cookie and Set-Cookie2"
• Maybe in reply to: Jonathan Stark: "RFC2109 addition..."
• Next in thread: Larry Masinter: "Re: RFC2109 addition..."