On Sat, 2008-10-25 at 23:55 +0100, sebb wrote: Hi Sebastian,
Formally speaking RFC2965 superseded RFC2109 and rendered it obsolete. However, RFC2965, probably, _should_ be backward compatible > I've been doing some testing with HttpClient 4.0 beta1, and it is > rejecting cookies of the form: > > Set-Cookie: special="abcd efgh"; Version=1 > This cookie seems to work for me. One with an explicit domain attribute does not: Set-Cookie: special="abcd efgh"; domain="localhost"; Version=1 > when tested against a server on localhost, the error message is: > > Illegal domain attribute: "localhost".Domain of origin: "localhost.local" > > This appears to be coming from the RFC2965Spec validation which is > chosen by the BestMatchSpec class. > > Surely only Set-Cookie2: headers should be required to pass the > RFC2965 validation? > Probably you are right, but I would like to revisit the spec to be 100% sure. > It looks like the BestMatchSpec class does not allow for using > RFC2109, which I would expect to be used here. > We could make this configurable. Would that make sense for you? Oleg > I can get round the problem by using an IP address instead of a > un-dotted host name, but it seems to me that the wrong Cookie spec > class is being chosen here. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
