- From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 22:56:39 +1300
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 22/12/2015 10:41 p.m., Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 05:18:39PM +1100, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> As discussed earlier <http://www.w3.org/mid/FAF2C2E8-0A6A-4C34-B4C4-57190AAE118D@mnot.net>, we are going to use a Call for Adoption process to assure that what we specify in terms of changes to Cookies -- if anything -- will actually get implemented. >> >> Based on what we've talked about so far, I believe two specifications are ready for consideration: >> >> * https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-west-leave-secure-cookies-alone-04 >> * https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-west-cookie-prefixes-05 >> >> So, please discuss on-list: >> >> 1) Your intent to implement these specifications (or lack thereof). >> 2) Your support for these specifications (or lack thereof). > > As the main author of haproxy, I definitely support these drafts which > go in the right direction when it comes to securing cookies. In their > current state these drafts apparently don't affect how haproxy uses > cookies, though if updates are needed, we'll have to perform them. > > The drafts are quite clear and still open to improvements. I think that > adopting them will help quickly reaching consensus on these proposals. > > Regards, > Willy > > As the maintainer for Squid, my position is the same as above. Amos
Received on Tuesday, 22 December 2015 09:57:22 UTC