Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why HTTP/2.0 does not seem interesting (2012)

varnish-cache.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 50 posts

Re: Why HTTP/2.0 does not seem interesting (2012)

#2

Post by kkielhofner »

A good analysis but somewhat dated. It has been established, for instance, that with a compatible SSL lib and TLS NPN support SPDY/HTTPbis can be supported on the same socket and port as HTTPS. With that said I really like what PHK has to say about "HTTP routers".

Re: Why HTTP/2.0 does not seem interesting (2012)

#3

Post by exceptione » 

  In my view, HTTP/2.0 should kill Cookies as a concept,
  and replace it with a session/identity facility, which makes 
  it easier to do things right with HTTP/2.0 than with HTTP/1.1.
count me in. Cookies are a huge waste of bandwidth and freaking annoying here in Europe as you cannot visit a site anymore without being warned you are about to receive yet even more cookies.

Re: Why HTTP/2.0 does not seem interesting (2012)

#4

Post by yahelc »

exceptione wrote: post #3

In my view, HTTP/2.0 should kill Cookies as a concept, and replace it with a session/identity facility, which makes it easier to do things right with HTTP/2.0 than with HTTP/1.1. count me in. Cookies are a huge waste of bandwidth and freaking annoying here in Europe as you cannot visit a site anymore without being warned you are about to receive yet even more cookies.

> Cookies are...freaking annoying here in Europe as you cannot visit a site anymore without being warned you are about to receive yet even more cookies.

Seems like the blame for that lies not with cookies themselves, but with the EU's cookie law.

Re: Why HTTP/2.0 does not seem interesting (2012)

#5

Post by exceptione »

yahelc wrote: post #4
exceptione wrote: post #3

In my view, HTTP/2.0 should kill Cookies as a concept, and replace it with a session/identity facility, which makes it easier to do things right with HTTP/2.0 than with HTTP/1.1. count me in. Cookies are a huge waste of bandwidth and freaking annoying here in Europe as you cannot visit a site anymore without being warned you are about to receive yet even more cookies.

> Cookies are...freaking annoying here in Europe as you cannot visit a site anymore without being warned you are about to receive yet even more cookies. Seems like the blame for that lies not with cookies themselves, but with the EU's cookie law.

Well the law is implementend in an annoying fashion. For functional cookies there is no requirement to ask permisson. But many websites choose to block all content asking to permit them to place additional cookies for benefits, i.e. tracking cookies.

Like the author said:

  Cookies are, as the EU commision correctly noted, 
  fundamentally flawed, because they store potentially 
  sensitive information on whatever computer the user 
  happens  to use, and as a result of various abuses and
  incompetences, EU felt compelled to legislate a "notice 
  and announce" policy for HTTP-cookies.

Re: Why HTTP/2.0 does not seem interesting (2012)

#6

Post by yalogin »

exceptione wrote: post #3

In my view, HTTP/2.0 should kill Cookies as a concept, and replace it with a session/identity facility, which makes it easier to do things right with HTTP/2.0 than with HTTP/1.1. count me in. Cookies are a huge waste of bandwidth and freaking annoying here in Europe as you cannot visit a site anymore without being warned you are about to receive yet even more cookies.

What is the alternative to cookies? What does he mean by session/identity facility?

Re: Why HTTP/2.0 does not seem interesting (2012)

#7

Post by _delirium »

yalogin wrote: post #6
exceptione wrote: post #3

In my view, HTTP/2.0 should kill Cookies as a concept, and replace it with a session/identity facility, which makes it easier to do things right with HTTP/2.0 than with HTTP/1.1. count me in. Cookies are a huge waste of bandwidth and freaking annoying here in Europe as you cannot visit a site anymore without being warned you are about to receive yet even more cookies.

What is the alternative to cookies? What does he mean by session/identity facility?

There's some discussion in this thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2012JulSep/...

in short,

   the need for a Session header to replace the use of Cookies
   for basic session management

Re: Why HTTP/2.0 does not seem interesting (2012)

#8

Post by Bosence »

yahelc wrote: post #4
exceptione wrote: post #3

In my view, HTTP/2.0 should kill Cookies as a concept, and replace it with a session/identity facility, which makes it easier to do things right with HTTP/2.0 than with HTTP/1.1. count me in. Cookies are a huge waste of bandwidth and freaking annoying here in Europe as you cannot visit a site anymore without being warned you are about to receive yet even more cookies.

> Cookies are...freaking annoying here in Europe as you cannot visit a site anymore without being warned you are about to receive yet even more cookies. Seems like the blame for that lies not with cookies themselves, but with the EU's cookie law.

Oh yes, the regulation was rushed in by people not really sure what to do or what was happening.

Why it couldn't be a browser option, I have no idea.

Re: Why HTTP/2.0 does not seem interesting (2012)

#9

Post by solox3 »

exceptione wrote: post #3

In my view, HTTP/2.0 should kill Cookies as a concept, and replace it with a session/identity facility, which makes it easier to do things right with HTTP/2.0 than with HTTP/1.1. count me in. Cookies are a huge waste of bandwidth and freaking annoying here in Europe as you cannot visit a site anymore without being warned you are about to receive yet even more cookies.

The EU "Cookie law" is not limited to cookies. The term used in regulation 6 is "storage", which includes at least localStorage, headers, and remotely hosted solutions (off the top of my head).
Post reply on HN