ietf-http-wg@w3.org from July to September 2013 by author

Adrien de Croy

• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Sunday, 4 August)

Adrien W. de Croy

• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Thursday, 18 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: Fwd: IPR Disclosure: Microsoft Corporation's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: #487 Resubmission of 403 (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: Ranges (Monday, 1 July)

Albert Lunde

• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: Please don't re-write TLS (Was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate) (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)

Alex Rousskov

• Re: WGLC: p1 MUSTs (Wednesday, 31 July)

Alexey Melnikov

• Re: HTTP/2.0 issue: magic method registration (Thursday, 22 August)
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• CONTINUATION frame and continuation flag (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: [#168] After TLS is finished (Wednesday, 10 July)

Amos Jeffries

• Re: HTTP/2 extensions and proxies (Monday, 30 September)
• Re: Issues addressed in the -24 drafts (and getting to IETF Last Call) (Saturday, 28 September)
• Re: no-transform & working group last call for -p1 et al (Friday, 27 September)
• Re: use of Warning in request messages (Sunday, 15 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Saturday, 7 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Friday, 6 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• HTTP/2.0 issue: magic method registration (Thursday, 22 August)
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: Who implemented which version of the compression draft? (Thursday, 8 August)
• Re: WGLC: p2 MUSTs (Sunday, 4 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Saturday, 3 August)
• Re: Question regarding perfect forward secrecy in http 2.0 (Friday, 2 August)
• Re: MUST use normative language (Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback) (Thursday, 1 August)
• Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* (Monday, 29 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Wednesday, 24 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Thursday, 18 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: HTTP/2 : problem with section 3.5 Connection setup magic (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: SETTINGS error handling (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Tuesday, 16 July)
• HTTP/2 : problem with section 3.5 Connection setup magic (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: Compression update (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. (Friday, 5 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Friday, 5 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Monday, 1 July)

Andrew Rockwell

• RE: Removing dropped entry from ref set (Monday, 23 September)

Ben Niven-Jenkins

• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? (Wednesday, 3 July)

Benjamin Carlyle

• Re: [#202] reason phrase (Wednesday, 14 August)

Bjoern Hoehrmann

• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Tuesday, 16 July)

Brian Raymor (MS OPEN TECH)

• RE: Agenda for Seattle Interim (Wednesday, 25 September)
• RE: Who implemented which version of the compression draft? (Wednesday, 7 August)
• HTTP/2-04 Katana (C#) open source server prototype (Tuesday, 30 July)

Carsten Krüger

• Re: Question regarding perfect forward secrecy in http 2.0 (Monday, 5 August)
• Question regarding perfect forward secrecy in http 2.0 (Friday, 2 August)

Christian Grothoff

• Re: HTTP header compression benchmark (Sunday, 28 July)
• HTTP header compression benchmark (Saturday, 20 July)

Christian Parpart

• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Wednesday, 10 July)

Christopher Mueller

• MPEG-DASH over HTTP/2.0 SPDY (Sunday, 14 July)

cowwoc

• Re: MUST use normative language (Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback) (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: Fwd: IPR Disclosure: Microsoft Corporation's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Wednesday, 3 July)
• NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Wednesday, 3 July)

Daniel Stenberg

• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Monday, 2 September)

Dave Crocker

• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)

David Morris

• Re: chunk-extensions (Sunday, 15 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: END_PUSH_PROMISE (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: [#202] reason phrase (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: CONTINUATION frame and continuation flag (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: Question regarding perfect forward secrecy in http 2.0 (Friday, 2 August)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: Default Stream Priority? (Friday, 19 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Monday, 1 July)

Eliot Lear

• no-transform & working group last call for -p1 et al (Friday, 27 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: What "mandatory to offer" means (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: DNS behaviour should be specified (the principled & forward-thinking case for SRV) (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: MUST use normative language (Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback) (Thursday, 1 August)
• MUST use normative language (Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback) (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Sunday, 28 July)

emile.stephan@orange.com

• implementation adding HTTP version negotiation in the clear to NodeJS Indutny Spdy module (Saturday, 3 August)
• RE: Tracking implementations (Tuesday, 30 July)
• HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS (Monday, 29 July)

Eric J. Bowman

• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Thursday, 19 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)

Fred Akalin

• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: Removing dropped entry from ref set (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: Removing dropped entry from ref set (Monday, 23 September)
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 (Thursday, 19 September)
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: Who implemented which version of the compression draft? (Wednesday, 7 August)
• Re: Who implemented which version of the compression draft? (Wednesday, 7 August)
• Who implemented which version of the compression draft? (Wednesday, 7 August)
• Re: Public node-http2 server (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: HTTP 2 Header Tables and Priority (Sunday, 4 August)
• Re: "MAY employ flow control", was: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS (Monday, 29 July)

Gabriel Montenegro

• FW: New Version Notification for draft-montenegro-httpbis-http2-server-profiles-00.txt (Friday, 6 September)

Glen Knowles

• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)

Gábor Molnár

• HTTP/2 extensions and proxies (Monday, 30 September)
• Re: Removing dropped entry from ref set (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Error code for PING frame with wrong size - https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/246 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Header compresison: unbounded memory use, again (Saturday, 7 September)
• Re: More header compression comments (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams (Tuesday, 20 August)
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams (Tuesday, 20 August)
• Public node-http2 server (Monday, 5 August)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 30 July)
• MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: Header Compression - streaming proposal (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: WINDOW_UPDATE Clarification (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Header Compression - streaming proposal (Monday, 8 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate, mk2 (Saturday, 6 July)
• Re: Header Compression - streaming proposal (Friday, 5 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Friday, 5 July)
• Header Compression - streaming proposal (Friday, 5 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Thursday, 4 July)
• Header compression implementation (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Header compression question (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Header Compression Overview (Monday, 1 July)

Henrik Nordström

• draft-fielding-http-key-02 obvious shortcoming & failure (Thursday, 25 July)

Henry Story

• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Monday, 15 July)

IESG Secretary

• HTTPbis WG Interim Meeting, October 9-11, 2013 (Thursday, 29 August)

Ilari Liusvaara

• Re: Issues addressed in the -24 drafts (and getting to IETF Last Call) (Monday, 30 September)
• Re: Issues addressed in the -24 drafts (and getting to IETF Last Call) (Friday, 27 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Friday, 6 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Monday, 2 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: HPACK substitution & header table pruning (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Monday, 22 July)
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions (Thursday, 18 July)
• Re: Header Compression Overview (Tuesday, 2 July)

Ilya Grigorik

• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)

internet-drafts@ietf.org

• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-method-registrations-13.txt (Wednesday, 25 September)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-authscheme-registrations-08.txt (Wednesday, 25 September)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-24.txt (Wednesday, 25 September)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-24.txt (Wednesday, 25 September)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-24.txt (Wednesday, 25 September)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-24.txt (Wednesday, 25 September)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-24.txt (Wednesday, 25 September)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-24.txt (Wednesday, 25 September)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-03.txt (Tuesday, 27 August)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-02.txt (Wednesday, 21 August)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-06.txt (Wednesday, 21 August)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-05.txt (Tuesday, 13 August)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-method-registrations-12.txt (Tuesday, 6 August)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-authscheme-registrations-07.txt (Tuesday, 6 August)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-23.txt (Monday, 15 July)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-23.txt (Monday, 15 July)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-23.txt (Monday, 15 July)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-23.txt (Monday, 15 July)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-23.txt (Monday, 15 July)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-23.txt (Monday, 15 July)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-01.txt (Tuesday, 9 July)
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04.txt (Monday, 8 July)

J Ross Nicoll

• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Sunday, 14 July)
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Saturday, 13 July)

Jain, Shakesh

• Re: Who implemented which version of the compression draft? (Wednesday, 7 August)

James M Snell

• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Tuesday, 24 September)
• FYI: LINK and UNLINK (Monday, 23 September)
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 (Monday, 2 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Saturday, 31 August)
• Re: HPACK substitution & header table pruning (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: RLE for header compression opcodes (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Type codecs within hpack (Friday, 23 August)
• Re: Type codecs within hpack (Friday, 23 August)
• Re: Type codecs within hpack (Friday, 23 August)
• Re: Type codecs within hpack (Friday, 23 August)
• RE: Type codecs within hpack (Friday, 23 August)
• Type codecs within hpack (Friday, 23 August)
• Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-snell-link-method-03.txt (Thursday, 22 August)
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Restricting the HTTP method definition (Tuesday, 20 August)
• Re: Nice (Monday, 19 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Saturday, 17 August)
• Re: Nice (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: Nice (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: Nice (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: Header Compression... (Thursday, 15 August)
• Re: Header Compression... (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 (Tuesday, 13 August)
• UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Implicit close of idle streams (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: http methods (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size (Monday, 12 August)
• CONTINUATION Frame Size (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: Header Compression... (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Header Compression... (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: CONTINUATION frame and continuation flag (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: [#202] reason phrase (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Monday, 5 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Monday, 5 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Monday, 5 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Monday, 5 August)
• PUSH Clarifications (Monday, 5 August)
• Re: Continuation Frames in draft -04 (Monday, 5 August)
• Re: Header Compression: Reference set choice (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: question on non header block data of chained HEADERS and PP (Monday, 29 July)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 23 July)
• implementation regrets... (Monday, 22 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Alternative Header Compression Update.. (Wednesday, 10 July)
• WINDOW_UPDATE Clarification (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Issue #171: ACK Frame Proposal (Low Priority) (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Typed Header Codecs Update (Monday, 8 July)
• Header Compression Implementation Feedback (Monday, 8 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: Issue # 164: HTTP Method Case (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Issue # 164: HTTP Method Case (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Header Compression Clarifications (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Header Compression Overview (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Header Compression Overview (Tuesday, 2 July)
• RE: Header Compression Overview (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Header Compression Overview (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: [#156] Pushing HEAD (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: [#156] Pushing HEAD (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: Header Compression Overview (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: Header Compression Overview (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values (Monday, 1 July)
• Issue #155: Capping header compression index values (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: Header Compression Overview (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Monday, 1 July)
• Header Compression Overview (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the request is complete (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: HTTP Mapping editorial changes (Monday, 1 July)

Jan Algermissen

• Applicability of new status code "4xx Credentials expired"? (Sunday, 11 August)

Jeff Pinner

• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 (Thursday, 15 August)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 wireshark dissector (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream (Monday, 12 August)
• Continuation Frames in draft -04 (Monday, 5 August)
• Re: Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. (Monday, 8 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the request is complete (Monday, 1 July)

Jesse Wilson

• Jesse's feedback on HTTP/2 header compression (Thursday, 29 August)
• HPACK substitution & header table pruning (Monday, 26 August)

Jo Liss

• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Friday, 20 September)
• Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Friday, 20 September)

Josh Goodall

• DNS behaviour should be specified (the principled & forward-thinking case for SRV) (Saturday, 10 August)

Josh Howlett

• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Tuesday, 16 July)

Julian Reschke

• Re: Issues addressed in the -24 drafts (and getting to IETF Last Call) (Saturday, 28 September)
• httpbis -24 drafts (Wednesday, 25 September)
• Re: #496, was: p6: Warning header field (Monday, 23 September)
• Warning code space (p6) (Monday, 23 September)
• #496, was: p6: Warning header field (Monday, 23 September)
• #343, was: chunk-extensions (Tuesday, 17 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Sunday, 15 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Sunday, 15 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Sunday, 15 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Saturday, 14 September)
• Re: #495 WGLC: p4 editorial nits (Saturday, 14 September)
• #495 WGLC: p4 editorial nits (Friday, 13 September)
• #495 WGLC: p4 editorial nits (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (Thursday, 12 September)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (Thursday, 12 September)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (Thursday, 12 September)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (Thursday, 12 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Monday, 9 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 (Monday, 2 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Monday, 2 September)
• #490, was: Ranges (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Re: http methods (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: http methods (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: http methods (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: http methods (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: http methods (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: http methods (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: http methods (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Wednesday, 7 August)
• Re: [#202] reason phrase (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: [#202] reason phrase (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Monday, 5 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Monday, 5 August)
• Re: MUST use normative language (Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback) (Thursday, 1 August)
• "MAY employ flow control", was: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback (Wednesday, 31 July)
• draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback (Wednesday, 31 July)
• feedback for draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-01 (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* (Monday, 29 July)
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* (Monday, 29 July)
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* (Monday, 29 July)
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* (Monday, 29 July)
• httpbis -23 drafts (Sunday, 28 July)
• #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* (Sunday, 28 July)
• #483, was: WGLC p1: MUST fix Content-Length? (Sunday, 28 July)
• Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses (Sunday, 28 July)
• Re: #486, was: p2: Expectation extensions (Sunday, 28 July)
• #303: Generic semantics for the 400 status code (also #302) (Sunday, 28 July)
• Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-23, "6.3.6 205 Reset Content" (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• #491, was: draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-23, "6.3.6 205 Reset Content" (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-23, "6.3.6 205 Reset Content" (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: #481, was: WGLC: p7 MUSTs (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: #487 Resubmission of 403 (Monday, 1 July)

Karl Dubost

• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Monday, 16 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)

Ken Murchison

• Re: #495 WGLC: p4 editorial nits (Saturday, 14 September)
• Re: #495 WGLC: p4 editorial nits (Friday, 13 September)
• WGLC: p4 editorial nits (Thursday, 12 September)

Kulkarni, Saurabh

• Re: END_FLOW_CONTROL for particular stream interpretation (Wednesday, 24 July)
• END_FLOW_CONTROL for particular stream interpretation (Wednesday, 24 July)
• SETTINGS_MAX_BUFFER_SIZE in SETTINGS Frame? (Wednesday, 24 July)
• Default Stream Priority? (Friday, 19 July)

Larry Masinter

• RE: Restricting the HTTP method definition (Saturday, 24 August)

Leif Hedstrom

• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Friday, 27 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Monday, 16 September)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Monday, 29 July)

Ludin, Stephen

• Re: Wireshark dissector update (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Wireshark dissector update (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 wireshark dissector (Wednesday, 14 August)
• HTTP/2.0 wireshark dissector (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Flow control clarification (Saturday, 20 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: Please don't re-write TLS (Was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate) (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)

M Stefan

• Authentication over HTTP (Sunday, 14 July)

Magnus Westerlund

• Usage of HTTP Proxies in NAT/FW traversal for RTCWeb (Friday, 30 August)

Manger, James H

• RE: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Thursday, 19 September)
• RE: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Tuesday, 3 September)
• RE: CONTINUATION Frame Size (Wednesday, 14 August)
• RE: CONTINUATION Frame Size (Tuesday, 13 August)

Mark Delany

• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)

Mark Nottingham

• Re: Agenda for Seattle Interim (Monday, 30 September)
• Re: Issues addressed in the -24 drafts (and getting to IETF Last Call) (Monday, 30 September)
• Issues addressed in the -24 drafts (and getting to IETF Last Call) (Thursday, 26 September)
• Re: Agenda for Seattle Interim (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: Warning code space (p6) (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Thursday, 19 September)
• Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Rough agenda for Vancouver (Tuesday, 17 September)
• Agenda for Seattle Interim (Tuesday, 17 September)
• Re: HTTPbis WG Interim Meeting, October 9-11, 2013 (Tuesday, 17 September)
• Re: use of Warning in request messages (Tuesday, 17 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Tuesday, 17 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Sunday, 15 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Sunday, 15 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') (Thursday, 12 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Monday, 9 September)
• Re: HTTPbis WG Interim Meeting, October 9-11, 2013 (Monday, 9 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Monday, 9 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Monday, 9 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Monday, 2 September)
• Fwd: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt) (Saturday, 31 August)
• New mailing list: http-devops (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Encryption Design Team [was: What "mandatory to offer" means] (Monday, 26 August)
• Planning our next Interim Meeting (Monday, 26 August)
• What "mandatory to offer" means (Sunday, 25 August)
• Draft Minutes from Hamburg (Friday, 23 August)
• Berlin Minutes (Friday, 23 August)
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: Nice (Monday, 19 August)
• Issues addressed in the -23 drafts (Tuesday, 6 August)
• FYI: ALPN in OpenSSL (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Agenda Revision for Friday (Thursday, 1 August)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: feedback for draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-01 (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: Berlin and Hamburg Agendas (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: Tracking implementations (Monday, 29 July)
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* (Monday, 29 July)
• Tracking implementations (Monday, 29 July)
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* (Monday, 29 July)
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* (Monday, 29 July)
• Re: #303: Generic semantics for the 400 status code (also #302) (Sunday, 28 July)
• Re: HTTP header compression benchmark (Sunday, 28 July)
• Re: draft-fielding-http-key-02 obvious shortcoming & failure (Sunday, 28 July)
• Re: Berlin and Hamburg Agendas (Monday, 22 July)
• Berlin and Hamburg Agendas (Monday, 22 July)
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 14 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Fwd: IPR Disclosure: Microsoft Corporation's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: Incorporating Layering TF work [was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate, mk2] (Friday, 5 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Thursday, 4 July)
• Incorporating Layering TF work [was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate, mk2] (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Header compression question (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Rough Minutes from SF F2F (Monday, 1 July)

Markus Lanthaler

• RE: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• RE: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• RE: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• RE: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)

Martin J. Dürst

• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Thursday, 19 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Thursday, 19 September)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Saturday, 17 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Saturday, 17 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Wednesday, 14 August)

Martin Nilsson

• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Sunday, 14 July)

Martin Thomson

• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Monday, 9 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Monday, 9 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Friday, 6 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Friday, 6 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: More header compression comments (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• [#197] the extra stuff in GOAWAY (Friday, 30 August)
• CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Friday, 30 August)
• Re: Jesse's feedback on HTTP/2 header compression (Friday, 30 August)
• Fwd: [rtcweb] Purpose of PNTAW list (Friday, 30 August)
• Header compression editor's draft moved (Thursday, 29 August)
• Re: Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Re: New HPACK draft out (-03) (Tuesday, 27 August)
• More header compression comments (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: HPACK substitution & header table pruning (Tuesday, 27 August)
• RLE for header compression opcodes (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Type codecs within hpack (Friday, 23 August)
• Re: Type codecs within hpack (Friday, 23 August)
• Re: Type codecs within hpack (Friday, 23 August)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-06.txt (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: END_PUSH_PROMISE (Wednesday, 21 August)
• END_PUSH_PROMISE (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams (Tuesday, 20 August)
• Re: Nice (Monday, 19 August)
• Re: PUSH_PROMISE at invalid times (Monday, 19 August)
• Re: Nice (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: Nice (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: Nice (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: Nice (Friday, 16 August)
• Nice (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 (Thursday, 15 August)
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 (Thursday, 15 August)
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 (Thursday, 15 August)
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 (Thursday, 15 August)
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-05.txt (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream (Monday, 12 August)
• [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream (Monday, 12 August)
• [#193] Request payloads and push (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: Applicability of new status code "4xx Credentials expired"? (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: Connection-level flow control and DATA frame against closed state streams (Friday, 9 August)
• Re: Connection-level flow control and DATA frame against closed state streams (Wednesday, 7 August)
• Re: CONTINUATION frame and continuation flag (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: Continuation Frames in draft -04 (Tuesday, 6 August)
• [#202] reason phrase (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: HTTP 2 Header Tables and Priority (Monday, 5 August)
• [#186] Negotiation strings (Saturday, 3 August)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: Header compression integrity (Sunday, 28 July)
• Re: question on non header block data of chained HEADERS and PP (Sunday, 28 July)
• Re: Berlin and Hamburg Agendas (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: SETTINGS_MAX_BUFFER_SIZE in SETTINGS Frame? (Wednesday, 24 July)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: 6.9.2 Initial Flow Control Window Size Example (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: 6.5.2 FLOW_CONTROL_OPTIONS text (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Implementation drafts for Hamburg (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: Default Stream Priority? (Friday, 19 July)
• Re: Default Stream Priority? (Friday, 19 July)
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions (Thursday, 18 July)
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions (Thursday, 18 July)
• Re: Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: SETTINGS error handling (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: HTTP/2 : problem with section 3.5 Connection setup magic (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Compression update (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: Header Compression - streaming proposal (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: WINDOW_UPDATE Clarification (Tuesday, 9 July)
• [#168] After TLS is finished (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04.txt (Monday, 8 July)
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. (Friday, 5 July)
• Re: Header Compression - streaming proposal (Friday, 5 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes (Wednesday, 3 July)
• HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate, mk2 (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Issue # 164: HTTP Method Case (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: [#156] Pushing HEAD (Tuesday, 2 July)
• [#156] Pushing HEAD (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the request is complete (Monday, 1 July)
• Late change to implementation draft? (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Monday, 1 July)

Michael Sweet

• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Header Compression... (Thursday, 15 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') (Saturday, 10 August)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') (Saturday, 10 August)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Sunday, 28 July)
• Re: HTTP header compression benchmark (Monday, 22 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback (Tuesday, 9 July)
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. (Friday, 5 July)
• Re: One comment on draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-00 (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Thursday, 4 July)
• One comment on draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-00 (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Monday, 1 July)

Michael Thornburgh

• RE: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 28 August)
• RE: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 28 August)
• RE: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 27 August)

Michael Tuexen

• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 29 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 27 August)

Michael Welzl

• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Friday, 30 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 29 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 29 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 28 August)

mike amundsen

• Re: Applicability of new status code "4xx Credentials expired"? (Sunday, 11 August)

Mike Belshe

• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Thursday, 19 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 29 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Monday, 22 July)
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: Fwd: IPR Disclosure: Microsoft Corporation's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 (Wednesday, 10 July)
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. (Monday, 8 July)
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. (Friday, 5 July)
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. (Friday, 5 July)
• Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. (Friday, 5 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)

Mike Bishop

• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: Removing dropped entry from ref set (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Removing dropped entry from ref set (Monday, 23 September)
• RE: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• RE: Type codecs within hpack (Friday, 23 August)
• RE: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• RE: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• RE: PUSH Clarifications (Monday, 5 August)
• RE: Header Compression: Reference set choice (Tuesday, 30 July)
• RE: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• RE: Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set (Wednesday, 17 July)
• RE: Alternative Header Compression Update.. (Wednesday, 10 July)
• RE: Header Compression Implementation Feedback (Tuesday, 9 July)
• RE: Header Compression Implementation Feedback (Tuesday, 9 July)
• RE: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Tuesday, 2 July)
• RE: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Tuesday, 2 July)
• RE: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• RE: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• RE: Header Compression Overview (Tuesday, 2 July)
• RE: Header Compression Overview (Monday, 1 July)
• RE: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Monday, 1 July)

Nicholas Hurley

• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)

Nico Williams

• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: The List (of application-layer desired features) (Friday, 30 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Friday, 2 August)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 19 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 19 July)
• Efficiency and statefulness in conflict (Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns) (Friday, 19 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 19 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Thursday, 18 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 18 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: Web Keys and HTTP Signatures (Monday, 8 July)
• Re: Web Keys and HTTP Signatures (Monday, 8 July)

Nicolas Mailhot

• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Monday, 16 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Monday, 16 September)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Sunday, 18 August)
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Thursday, 18 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: HTTPS, proxy environment variables and non-CONNECT access (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: HTTPS, proxy environment variables and non-CONNECT access (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Sunday, 14 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Sunday, 14 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Sunday, 14 July)
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 14 July)

Osama Mazahir

• RE: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Friday, 6 September)

Pasi Sarolahti

• Re: [tcpm] httpbis chromium data (Friday, 2 August)

Patrick McManus

• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: Encryption Design Team [was: What "mandatory to offer" means] (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: [#202] reason phrase (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size (Tuesday, 13 August)
• http/2 hello world (Sunday, 4 August)
• Re: HTTP/2-04 Katana (C#) open source server prototype (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: HTTP/2-04 Katana (C#) open source server prototype (Tuesday, 30 July)
• question on non header block data of chained HEADERS and PP (Friday, 26 July)
• Re: END_FLOW_CONTROL for particular stream interpretation (Wednesday, 24 July)
• 6.9.2 Initial Flow Control Window Size Example (Tuesday, 23 July)
• 6.5.2 FLOW_CONTROL_OPTIONS text (Tuesday, 23 July)
• SETTINGS error handling (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)

Patrick Pelletier

• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)

Peter Lepeska

• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Saturday, 3 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Friday, 2 August)
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS (Monday, 29 July)

Peter Occil

• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Saturday, 7 September)

Poul-Henning Kamp

• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: What "mandatory to offer" means (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: http methods (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: http methods (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: http methods (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: http methods (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: http methods (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') (Saturday, 10 August)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') (Saturday, 10 August)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') (Saturday, 10 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Friday, 2 August)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 19 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 19 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 14 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)

Reto Bachmann-Gmür

• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Monday, 15 July)

Robert Collins

• Re: Type codecs within hpack (Friday, 23 August)
• Re: PUSH Clarifications (Monday, 5 August)
• Re: HTTPS, proxy environment variables and non-CONNECT access (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: HTTPS, proxy environment variables and non-CONNECT access (Tuesday, 16 July)
• HTTPS, proxy environment variables and non-CONNECT access (Tuesday, 16 July)

Roberto Peon

• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: Removing dropped entry from ref set (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: Header compresison: unbounded memory use, again (Saturday, 7 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 (Monday, 2 September)
• Re: [#197] the extra stuff in GOAWAY (Friday, 30 August)
• Re: Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE (Thursday, 29 August)
• Re: Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Re: Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Re: New HPACK draft out (-03) (Tuesday, 27 August)
• New HPACK draft out (-03) (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: HPACK substitution & header table pruning (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works (Saturday, 24 August)
• Re: Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works (Saturday, 24 August)
• Re: Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works (Friday, 23 August)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-02.txt (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 (Thursday, 15 August)
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 (Thursday, 15 August)
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 (Thursday, 15 August)
• incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 (Thursday, 15 August)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 wireshark dissector (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: http methods (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push (Monday, 12 August)
• Re: The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 6 August)
• The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: HTTP 2 Header Tables and Priority (Sunday, 4 August)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Friday, 26 July)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Wednesday, 24 July)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: Flow control clarification (Saturday, 20 July)
• Re: Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: SETTINGS error handling (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: SETTINGS error handling (Tuesday, 16 July)
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 14 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: Header Compression - streaming proposal (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Thursday, 4 July)
• Re: Issue # 164: HTTP Method Case (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Issue # 164: HTTP Method Case (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Header Compression Overview (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: [#156] Pushing HEAD (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the request is complete (Monday, 1 July)
• Re: Late change to implementation draft? (Monday, 1 July)

Ross Nicoll

• Re: Applicability of new status code "4xx Credentials expired"? (Monday, 12 August)

Roy T. Fielding

• Re: use of Warning in request messages (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: #496, was: p6: Warning header field (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Friday, 13 September)
• use of Warning in request messages (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (Thursday, 12 September)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (Thursday, 12 September)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (Thursday, 12 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Monday, 9 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Saturday, 7 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Saturday, 7 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: WGLC: p4 MUSTs (Friday, 23 August)
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: WGLC: p4, 304 Not Modified (Sunday, 11 August)
• #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') (Saturday, 10 August)
• Re: WGLC: p2 MUSTs (Sunday, 4 August)
• Re: WGLC: p1 MUSTs (Thursday, 1 August)
• Re: WGLC: p1 MUSTs (Thursday, 1 August)
• Re: WGLC: p1 MUSTs (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-23, "6.3.6 205 Reset Content" (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: #487 Resubmission of 403 (Monday, 1 July)

RUELLAN Herve

• RE: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Friday, 27 September)
• RE: More header compression comments (Friday, 6 September)
• RE: Header Compression: Reference set choice (Thursday, 1 August)
• RE: Header Compression: Reference set choice (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Header Compression: Reference set choice (Tuesday, 30 July)
• RE: Alternative Header Compression Update.. (Thursday, 11 July)
• RE: Header Compression - streaming proposal (Thursday, 11 July)
• RE: Compression update (Thursday, 11 July)
• RE: Header Compression Clarifications (Friday, 5 July)
• RE: Incorporating Layering TF work [was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate, mk2] (Thursday, 4 July)
• RE: One comment on draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-00 (Thursday, 4 July)
• RE: Header Compression Clarifications (Thursday, 4 July)
• RE: Header Compression Overview (Thursday, 4 July)
• RE: Header Compression Clarifications (Thursday, 4 July)
• RE: Header Compression Clarifications (Thursday, 4 July)
• RE: Header Compression Overview (Tuesday, 2 July)
• RE: Header compression question (Tuesday, 2 July)
• RE: Header compression question (Tuesday, 2 July)

Ryan Hamilton

• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 29 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Tuesday, 23 July)

Salvatore Loreto

• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)

Sam Pullara

• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Sunday, 14 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Thursday, 11 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Monday, 1 July)

Scharf, Michael (Michael)

• RE: [tcpm] Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Friday, 23 August)
• RE: The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 6 August)
• RE: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Monday, 5 August)
• Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Friday, 2 August)

Shigeki Ohtsu

• Re: initial stream id from a client (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• initial stream id from a client (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions (Friday, 19 July)
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions (Thursday, 18 July)
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions (Thursday, 18 July)
• Questions about stream state transitions (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)

Stephen Farrell

• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Thursday, 19 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)

Steve Davis

• Re: HTTP 2 Header Tables and Priority (Sunday, 4 August)
• HTTP 2 Header Tables and Priority (Sunday, 4 August)

Sébastien BARNOUD

• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Proposal to measure end-user latency (Tuesday, 3 September)

Sébastien Barnoud

• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Thursday, 5 September)

Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa

• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Saturday, 28 September)
• Re: Removing dropped entry from ref set (Tuesday, 24 September)
• HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 (Thursday, 19 September)
• Re: Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works (Friday, 6 September)
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Jesse's feedback on HTTP/2 header compression (Friday, 30 August)
• Re: Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE (Thursday, 29 August)
• Re: Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE (Thursday, 29 August)
• Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Re: Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works (Saturday, 24 August)
• Re: Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works (Saturday, 24 August)
• Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works (Friday, 23 August)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-02.txt (Thursday, 22 August)
• Re: PUSH_PROMISE at invalid times (Tuesday, 20 August)
• PUSH_PROMISE at invalid times (Saturday, 17 August)
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Wednesday, 14 August)
• :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: Connection-level flow control and DATA frame against closed state streams (Thursday, 8 August)
• Re: Connection-level flow control and DATA frame against closed state streams (Wednesday, 7 August)
• Connection-level flow control and DATA frame against closed state streams (Wednesday, 7 August)
• HTTP-draft-04/2.0 implementation in C (Sunday, 28 July)
• Header compression integrity (Sunday, 28 July)
• Re: END_FLOW_CONTROL for particular stream interpretation (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: 6.9.2 Initial Flow Control Window Size Example (Wednesday, 24 July)
• Re: Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set (Thursday, 18 July)
• Re: Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: SETTINGS error handling (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: SETTINGS error handling (Tuesday, 16 July)

Ted Hardie

• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 27 August)

Tim Bray

• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: Applicability of new status code "4xx Credentials expired"? (Sunday, 11 August)
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-03.txt (Thursday, 11 July)
• Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-03.txt (Thursday, 11 July)

Tobias Gondrom

• fyi: websec inviting more feedback on session continuation (i.e. cookies) during our meeting on Monday at 15:10 (Sunday, 28 July)

Werner Baumann

• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Thursday, 19 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)

Willy Tarreau

• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Thursday, 19 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Thursday, 19 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Thursday, 19 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Sunday, 15 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Sunday, 15 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Sunday, 15 September)
• Re: chunk-extensions (Sunday, 15 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Saturday, 7 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Saturday, 7 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Saturday, 7 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Friday, 6 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Friday, 6 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Friday, 6 September)
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency (Tuesday, 3 September)
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date (Monday, 2 September)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') (Sunday, 11 August)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') (Saturday, 10 August)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') (Saturday, 10 August)
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') (Saturday, 10 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Saturday, 10 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Saturday, 3 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Saturday, 3 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Friday, 2 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Friday, 2 August)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Tuesday, 30 July)
• Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses (Sunday, 28 July)
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 (Thursday, 25 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Sunday, 14 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)

Yi, EungJun

• A question about "Figure 1: Stream States" of the http2 draft. (Sunday, 29 September)

Yoav Nir

• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• RE: The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: MUST use normative language (Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback) (Thursday, 1 August)
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" (Wednesday, 31 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Friday, 26 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Monday, 22 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Wednesday, 17 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: Authentication over HTTP (Monday, 15 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Saturday, 13 July)
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns (Friday, 12 July)
• Re: Please don't re-write TLS (Was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate) (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Please don't re-write TLS (Was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate) (Wednesday, 3 July)

Yuchung Cheng

• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: [tcpm] Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Friday, 9 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Friday, 9 August)
• Re: [tcpm] TCP checksum issues? (Friday, 9 August)
• Re: Berlin and Hamburg Agendas (Monday, 22 July)
• Re: Berlin and Hamburg Agendas (Monday, 22 July)

Zhong Yu

• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition (Wednesday, 21 August)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Friday, 26 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Friday, 26 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Monday, 22 July)
• HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Monday, 22 July)

陈智昌

• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Tuesday, 24 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Saturday, 21 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources (Friday, 20 September)
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 (Wednesday, 18 September)
• Error code for PING frame with wrong size - https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/246 (Tuesday, 17 September)
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting (Friday, 13 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Monday, 9 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Monday, 9 September)
• Re: Wireshark dissector update (Monday, 9 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Thursday, 5 September)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 4 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Sunday, 1 September)
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 (Saturday, 31 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) (Wednesday, 28 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Tuesday, 27 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: What "mandatory to offer" means (Monday, 26 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater (Sunday, 25 August)
• Re: Nice (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: Nice (Friday, 16 August)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 wireshark dissector (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 wireshark dissector (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams (Wednesday, 14 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push (Tuesday, 13 August)
• http methods (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push (Tuesday, 13 August)
• Re: Connection-level flow control and DATA frame against closed state streams (Wednesday, 7 August)
• Re: The List (of application-layer desired features) (Tuesday, 6 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Saturday, 3 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Friday, 2 August)
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? (Friday, 2 August)
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS (Monday, 29 July)
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS (Monday, 29 July)
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS (Monday, 29 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? (Tuesday, 23 July)
• Re: Flow control clarification (Saturday, 20 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate, mk2 (Saturday, 6 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Wednesday, 3 July)
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate (Tuesday, 2 July)

Last message date: Monday, 30 September 2013 14:14:05 UTC