Re: draft-ietf-http-state-man-mec-03: $Version and path

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Sanjath: "some thoughts on extensions on REQUEST line."
• Previous message: Keld J|rn Simonsen: "cookies and security"
• Maybe in reply to: Gisle Aas: "draft-ietf-http-state-man-mec-03: $Version and path"

Foteos Macrides <MACRIDES@SCI.WFBR.EDU> wrote:
  > [concerning comparison of Path in cookie spec.]

  > 	You're getting into the can of worms with which the MHTML-WG has
  > been struggling, and would be unwise, IHMO, to take it on explicily in
  > the cookie specs as well, rather than leaving it as now, with an implicit
  > definition of "match" as "whatever the current HTTP specs define that
  > to mean for the path field of http[s] URLs (presently in Section 3.2.3
  > of RFC 2068 and the -08 revision draft)".

It probably makes sense to give *some* kind of definition of "match"
in the cookie spec.  Making reference to RFC 2068 sounds like a good
idea.

Dave Kristol

• Next message: Sanjath: "some thoughts on extensions on REQUEST line."
• Previous message: Keld J|rn Simonsen: "cookies and security"
• Maybe in reply to: Gisle Aas: "draft-ietf-http-state-man-mec-03: $Version and path"