- From: John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 07:48:36 -0500
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- cc: "=JeffH" <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com>, IETF HTTP State WG <http-state@ietf.org>, Internet Architecture Board <iab@iab.org>, www-tag@w3.org, Bil Corry <bil@corry.biz>, httpstate chair <httpstate-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>, Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
--On Saturday, March 05, 2011 16:45 -0800 Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote: > If you're revisiting history: > > There were a lot of issues raised and settled during the > development of HTTP 1.1 in the '90s, but the differences > between "what we're doing and don't want to change" and "what > should be" over cookies were irreconcilable at the time; 2616 > and 2617 got published without cookies, and a separate group > went on to publish 2965. I think you could say it was "out of > sync with how browsers were actually using cookies", but you > could also say that the browser implementors were less > interested in standards and security than they were in > competitive advantage. This is pretty much consistent with my recollection (I was "responsible" AD at the time). john
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 12:50:42 UTC