Re: Non-persistent Cookie proposal

James Gosling:
>One of the most important axis for evaluation of *any* protocol is how
>it scales.  All of the stateful dialog proposals that I've seen on this
>list score very low on this.

Both my proposal and (I believe) the one by Dave Kristol intend to
provide *some* minimal support for stateful dialogs as soon as
possible, not to be the ultimate stateful dialog solution.

>  When the web gets truly large, cache hit
>rates have to be *very* high.

Imminent death of the net predicted.

I don't know if cache hut rates will *have* to be very high, or even
if they will be.  I can imagine a large (but not necessarily fast)
web, even without any caching.

While I agree that a stateful dialog implemented with client-side Java
scripts will generally consume less bandwidth, I don't think that Java
browsers will be generally available, and, more importantly, generally
used by more than, say, 90% of web users for some years to come.

The currently discussed proposals intend to provide support for
stateful dialogs as soon as possible, say within half a year.

Koen.