Re: HTTP Session Extension draft

I notice in the draft that you use Connection: maintain in section 1.2
and the bit about server-proxies, but use Session: maintain in the
examples.  I personally prefer the Session: maintain, but I can see
reasons to use both.

I also wonder how difficult it would be to allow either side to open
the negotiation for a maintained session.  Could we allow the server
to send "Session: maintain" in response to a request which (from the
servers' point of view) is likely to be followed by requests for which
a session-orientation is useful?  Many servers would like to have
"click-trail" traces of web users' traversals; if you allow the server
to initiate a session, the current kludges using cgi scripts and
hidden variables could be eliminated.  The browser could respond to
such a request by a server with a simple Session: maintain
confirmation.


			Regards,
				Ted Hardie






> 
> I am submitting my draft for the HTTP Session Extension. This has been
> posted at http://ugly.resnova.com/httpsession.html for about 2 months and I
> have not received much feedback, so I'm going to see what happens when it
> gets distributed to a wider audience.
> 
> The new draft can be retrieved at:
> 
> http://ugly.resnova.com/draft-ietf-http-ses-ext-00.txt
> 
> I will try to put up an HTML version asap, and as usual there will be links
> to all of this stuff at:
> 
> http://ugly.resnova.com/html3.html
> 
> Thats it for now, enjoy!
> 
> Alex Hopmann
> ResNova Software, Inc.
> hopmann@holonet.net
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 5 July 1995 12:50:19 UTC