Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis

Eliot Lear wrote:
> Julian Reschke wrote:
>> But that would be an update to RCF2617, not RFC2616bis, right?
> 
> Do we know enough to know?

Well, RFC2616 doesn't define authentication, it relies on RFC2617. So as 
long as we keep that separation, I don't see any problem. Of course I'm 
making the assumption that we don't want to change this.

Best regards, Julian