- From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 09:21:35 +0100 (MET)
- To: dmk@research.bell-labs.com (Dave Kristol)
- Cc: koen@win.tue.nl, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com, www-talk@w3.org
Dave Kristol: > > > Two small comments on the errata: > > > > 1. The section `Compatibility with MS's implementation' states the problem, > > but no solution. I'd prefer it if you append something like > > > > Therefore, servers should be careful in sending complex cookies that use > > this specification to legacy HTTP/1.0 user agents. If an unknown HTTP/1.0 > > user agent is encountered, a server can determine its compatibility with > > this specification by first returning a response which sets a simple > > non-persistent cookie, and then examining the cookie header of any > > subsequent request. > >Okay, but.... Because the cookie spec. is separable from HTTP/1.1, and >because it will become a standard after HTTP/1.1, there's no assurance >that even HTTP/1.1 user agents will follow this spec. Yes, but we only need assurance that HTTP/1.1 agents won't have non-tolerant cookie header parsers if they follow netscape's spec. If I understand the situation correctly, MS will fix their parser in the next release, so they won't release a 1.1 agent with a non-tolerant parser. I can't guarantee that there won't be 1.1 agents with non-tolerant parsers, but it seems a reasonably safe bet. > So it might be >wise to avoid reference to HTTP/1.0. Maybe. Feel free to change my suggested text if you think it can be improved. >Also, what exactly do you mean by "unknown HTTP/1.0 user agent"? An agent for which the compatibility level is not known. I guess my text tries to say too many things with too little words. Please expand it to make it readable. >Dave Kristol Koen.
Received on Friday, 14 February 1997 03:21:48 UTC