On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
If the date processing behavior of existing implementations is an open issue, then perhaps the WG can settle on the correct wording via list discussion, or add the issue to the tracker:
I setup a little CGI that can be used to check what your browser thinks: http://daniel.haxx.se/cookie.cgi It sends a single cookie header that looks like: "Set-Cookie: testme=yesyes; expires=Wed Sep 1 22:01:55 69;"The script prints the Cookie: headers, so if you reload you should see "testme=yesyes" being output if the cookie is still there. If the cookie is still there, your browser of choice treats the date above as a date in the future.
My friends and I did a quick round and we tested a few browsers: Future: Firefox (2069) curl (2147483647 seconds) IE 7 (2069) Opera (year 2036) Android Historic: Chrome (both v4 and v5) Conclusion: Most clients seem to agree that '69' refers to '2069'. -- / daniel.haxx.se
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.