Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate

• From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
• Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2013 09:44:24 +1200
• To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
• Message-ID: <51D349B8.2060302@treenet.co.nz>

On 3/07/2013 9:27 a.m., William Chan (陈智昌) wrote:
> Yes, any client that cares about security will do the enforcement 
> regardless. The thing is there are two new proposals on the table 
> here. Sam's proposal is to simply drop :scheme and :host and always 
> assume same origin. James' modification is to assume same origin 
> unless otherwise specified. I prefer the status quo of explicitly 
> specifying the headers. And I think that unless there are compelling 
> reasons to *change* the spec, we should opt to keep it as is. Do 
> people feel strongly that we should adopt either Sam or James' 
> proposals for the implementation draft?

For this draft. No.

Amos

Received on Tuesday, 2 July 2013 21:44:49 UTC