- From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 14:41:39 +0100 (MET)
- To: Dave Kristol <dmk@bell-labs.com>
- Cc: koen@win.tue.nl, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
Dave Kristol:
>
>At 9:01 PM +0100 3/1/97, Koen Holtman wrote:
>>[...]
>>Also, I prefer not to have a Cookie2 header. You can be compatible
>>with old servers even if you do not have it.
>
>You can, but it is much messier, I think.
>>
>>I think the following compatibility scheme is optimal.
>>[cases omitted]
>
>The messy part is for a SMG ("new cookie") aware server to distinguish an
>old from a new cookie,
If I read the specs right:
Old: Cookie: CUSTOMER=WILE_E_COYOTE
New: Cookie: $Version="1"; Customer="WILE_E_COYOTE"; $Path="/acme"
Easy enough to distinguish: look for $Version at the start of the
header.
If I were to decode cookies, I would not even bother to distinguish
the formats beforehand. I would just code a parser which is able to
handle both formats.
I think that the spec would be messier, not cleaner, if a Cookie2
header were introduced.
>Dave Kristol
Koen.
Received on Sunday, 2 March 1997 05:46:06 UTC