On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Matt wrote:
[bug cut out, sounds like a true bug and a decent fix]
> the parsing of the cookie domain name will fail on many websites which
> have the domain (domainname.com) without the . in front. Places like
> altavista.com will fail but correct ones like google.com will pass
The "original" Netscape cookie docs didn't mention any such requirements. Not
that I've been able to find at least.
> The section failing is section 4 and I need it for a particular website I
> am parsing. Guess this doesn't match the rfc2109 standards? how about
> just putting a . in front if one isn't detected just so cookies on these
> websites work?
AFAIK, no web sites anywhere follow RFC2109 or RFC2965 that obsoletes 2109
(anyone seen Max-Age in use? ;-). They all just carry on doing cookies the
way they've done since day 1, like netscape did it...
--
Daniel Stenberg - http://daniel.haxx.se - +46-705-44 31 77
ech`echo xiun|tr nu oc|sed 'sx\([sx]\)\([xoi]\)xo un\2\1 is xg'`ol
