- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:27:50 +0200
- To: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2016-10-11 07:34, Mike West wrote:
> This -00 draft kicks off the process of updating RFC6265. The text
> should be identical to the existing RFC, with the exception of the
> addition of explicit step numbers to various algorithms for clarity. I
> would appreciate it if interested folks would spot check this port, as
> it will serve as the basis for the various changes that the group has
> suggested it would be comfortable making.
>
> In the near future, I plan to start bringing in text from the various
> drafts we've adopted ("Leave Secure Cookies Alone
> <https://httpwg.github.io/http-extensions/draft-ietf-httpbis-cookie-alone.html>",
> "Cookie Prefixes
> <https://httpwg.github.io/http-extensions/draft-ietf-httpbis-cookie-prefixes.html>",
> "Same-Site Cookies
> <https://httpwg.github.io/http-extensions/draft-ietf-httpbis-cookie-same-site.html>",
> and "EAT Cookies
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thomson-http-omnomnom>"), and
> addressing some of the open issues
> <https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Aopp-sec>.
> I'll try to do so granularly, so folks can have a reasonable chance of
> evaluating each set of changes on its own.
>
> Thanks!
>
> -mike
FWIW, the changes from RFC 6265 are these:
<https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis-00.txt>
Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 11 October 2016 09:28:30 UTC