Tuesday, 1 July 1997
Monday, 30 June 1997
- Re: 305/306 response codes
- RE: Digest Authentication bleat
- Re: Proposal: 100-Continue optional under Client control
- Re: Assigned paths
- Re: Assigned paths
- Proposal: 100-Continue optional under Client control
Friday, 27 June 1997
- Re: Assigned paths
- Updated test implementation for TCN available
- Re: Assigned paths
- Re: Status 100
- RE: confidentiality and the referer field
- Re: confidentiality and the referer field
- RE: confidentiality and the referer field
Thursday, 26 June 1997
- Re: confidentiality and the referer field
- Re: confidentiality and the referer field
- Re: confidentiality and the referer field
- Digest Authentication bleat
- Re: confidentiality and the referer field
- Re: Status 100
- Re: confidentiality and the referer field
- Status 100
- Re: confidentiality and the referer field
- Re: confidentiality and the referer field
- Re: confidentiality and the referer field
- Re: Assigned paths
- Re: confidentiality and the referer field
- Re: Assigned paths
- confidentiality and the referer field
- Re: Assigned paths
- Assigned paths
Tuesday, 24 June 1997
- Re: Transient content negotiation
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-http-state-man-mec-02.txt, .ps
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-http-state-man-mec-02.txt, .ps
Monday, 23 June 1997
- I-D ACTION:draft-cohen-http-305-306-responses-00.txt
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-http-negotiate-scenario-00.txt
- draft-ietf-http-negotiate-scenario.00.txt
Sunday, 22 June 1997
Saturday, 21 June 1997
Friday, 20 June 1997
Thursday, 19 June 1997
- new cookie I-D submitted
- Re: COMMENT: LAST CALL comment
- Re: First draft of negotiation requirements document
- Web Security
- Re: First draft of negotiation requirements document
Wednesday, 18 June 1997
- More thoughts on content negotiation
- Transient content negotiation
- Re: First draft of negotiation requirements document
- Re: 305/306 response codes
Tuesday, 17 June 1997
- Re: First draft of negotiation requirements document
- Re: First draft of negotiation requirements document
- Re: First draft of negotiation requirements document
- Re: 305/306 response codes
- Re: First draft of negotiation requirements document
- Re: 305/306 response codes
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-http-negotiate-scenario-00.txt
Monday, 16 June 1997
Sunday, 15 June 1997
- Re: OPTIONS method
- Re: COMMENT: LAST CALL comment
- Re: Proposal: Vary on Cookies
- Re: OPTIONS method
- Re: Proposal: Vary on Cookies
Friday, 13 June 1997
- First draft of negotiation requirements document
- Re: Proposal: Vary on Cookies
- Re: Proposal: Vary on Cookies
- Re: Proposal: Vary on Cookies
- Re: Proposal: Vary on Cookies
Thursday, 12 June 1997
- Re: Proposal: Vary on Cookies
- Proposal: Vary on Cookies
- Is Your Web Site A Secret?
- Re: 305/306 response codes
- Re: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST?
- Re: 305/306 response codes
Wednesday, 11 June 1997
- Re: 305/306 response codes
- Re: COMMENT: LAST CALL comment
- Re: A new suggestion on 100 CONTINUE
- Re: cache-busting and charsets again
- Re: cache-busting and charsets again
- Re: A new suggestion on 100 CONTINUE
- Re: A new suggestion on 100 CONTINUE
- Re: cache-busting document
- Re: A new suggestion on 100 CONTINUE
- Re: Question
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST
- Buggy TCP implementations. Was: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST?
- Re: Question
- Re: Question
- Re: Proxy Keep-Alive
- Proxy Keep-Alive
- Re: A new suggestion on 100 CONTINUE
- Re: A new suggestion on 100 CONTINUE
- Re: charsets again
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: OPTIONS method
- Re: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST?
- Re: cache-busting and charsets again
- Re: A new suggestion on 100 CONTINUE
- Re: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST?
- Re: A new suggestion on 100 CONTINUE
- charsets again
- Re: A new suggestion on 100 CONTINUE
- A new suggestion on 100 CONTINUE
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST?
- RE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST?
- Re: cache-busting and charsets again
- RE: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST re quests?
- Re: cache-busting document
- RE: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST re quests?
- cache-busting and charsets again
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST re quests?
- cache-busting and charsets again
- Re: cache-busting document
- RE: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST re quests?
- RE: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST re quests?
- Re: cache-busting document
- RE: 305/306 response codes
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
Tuesday, 10 June 1997
- RE: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST re quests?
- RE: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Unidentified subject!
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Feature negotiation requirements
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: cache-busting document
- Re: 305/306 response codes
- ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?
- Re: cache-busting document
- Re: cache-busting document
- Re: cache-busting document
- Re: cache-busting document
Monday, 9 June 1997
Sunday, 8 June 1997
Saturday, 7 June 1997
Sunday, 8 June 1997
Saturday, 7 June 1997
- Re: draft-ietf-http-negotiation-02.txt
- Re: cache-busting document
- Re: cache-busting document
- Re: cache-busting document
- cache-busting document
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: 305/306 response codes
- OPTIONS method
- RE: 305/306 response codes
Friday, 6 June 1997
- RE: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- 305/306 response codes
- RE: New feature negotiation syntax
- RE: New feature negotiation syntax
- RE: New feature negotiation syntax
- Graham Klyne on content negotiation
- draft-mutz-http-attributes-02.txt
- draft-ietf-http-negotiation-02.txt
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: HTTP/1.1 -- who disconnects the session?
- Persistent connections, and 1.0 browsers
- Re: HTTP/1.1 -- who disconnects the session?
- HTTP/1.1 -- who disconnects the session?
Thursday, 5 June 1997
- Re: COMMENT: LAST CALL comment
- RANGE-ERROR issue: proposed resolution
- Re: COMMENT: resolution
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
Wednesday, 4 June 1997
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: COMMENT: LAST CALL comment
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: COMMENT: LAST CALL comment
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: COMMENT: LAST CALL comment
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: COMMENT: LAST CALL comment
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
Tuesday, 3 June 1997
Monday, 2 June 1997
- Re: An experiment in producing RFC1122-style requirements checklist
- Re: An experiment in producing RFC1122-style requirements checklist
- Re: An experiment in producing RFC1122-style requirements checklist
Sunday, 1 June 1997
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
Saturday, 31 May 1997
Friday, 30 May 1997
- Re: NS, Verisign, Firefly proposal [was Re: Revised charter ,milestones
- RE: NS, Verisign, Firefly proposal [was Re: Revised charter ,milestones
- Re: Common Gateway Interface
- Re: Common Gateway Interface
- Re: Q: protocolls and fault tolerance
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: Common Gateway Interface
- Re: An experiment in producing RFC1122-style requirements checklist
- Re: An experiment in producing RFC1122-style requirements checklist
- Re: Q: protocolls and fault tolerance
- Re: Common Gateway Interface
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: NS, Verisign, Firefly proposal [was Re: Revised charter ,
- Re: Common Gateway Interface
- Re: Q: protocolls and fault tolerance
- Q: protocolls and fault tolerance
Thursday, 29 May 1997
- Re: Common Gateway Interface
- Re: Common Gateway Interface
- RE: An experiment in producing RFC1122-style requirements checkli st
- Re: Common Gateway Interface
- Common Gateway Interface
- Re: An experiment in producing RFC1122-style requirements checklist
- An experiment in producing RFC1122-style requirements checklist
- Re: NS, Verisign, Firefly proposal [was Re: Revised charter , milestones
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: NS, Verisign, Firefly proposal [was Re: Revised charter , milestones
- Re: NS, Verisign, Firefly proposal [was Re: Revised charter ,
- Re: NS, Verisign, Firefly proposal [was Re: Revised charter , milestones
Wednesday, 28 May 1997
- Re: NS, Verisign, Firefly proposal [was Re: Revised charter , milestones
- Re: Revised charter milestones
- Re: Revised charter milestones
- OPS specification
- Re: Revised charter milestones
- Re: Comment on PEP draft
- Cookie domain
- Re: Comment on PEP draft
- Cookie domain
- Cookie domain
- HTTP 1.1 Issue: 403VS404
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-http-negotiation-02.txt
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: URI -> URL when talking about 'moved ...'
- Re: URI -> URL when talking about 'moved ...'
- URI -> URL when talking about 'moved ...'
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
Monday, 26 May 1997
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- New content negotiation draft: draft-ietf-http-negotiation-02.txt
- Revised charter milestones
Sunday, 25 May 1997
- COMMENT: resolution
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: notes from previous Editing Group meeting: goals, docking
- COMMENT: LAST CALL comment
Saturday, 24 May 1997
- Re: HTTP 1.1 Issue: When To Close Connections
- RE: PEP Integration in RTSP
- notes from previous Editing Group meeting: goals, docking
- RE: PEP Integration in RTSP
- HTTP Issues LAST CALL; HTTP editing group
- RE: PEP Integration in RTSP
Friday, 23 May 1997
- RE: PEP Integration in RTSP
- Re: HTTP 1.1 Issue: When To Close Connections
- RE: PEP Integration in RTSP
- HTTP 1.1 Issue: When To Close Connections
- RE: PEP Integration in RTSP
- RE: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
Thursday, 22 May 1997
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: DES attack, help crack bad encryption!
- Re: DES attack, help crack bad encryption!
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
Tuesday, 20 May 1997
Monday, 19 May 1997
- Call for comments on feature tag syntax
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Comment on PEP draft
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: PEP Integration in RTSP
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: PEP Integration in RTSP
- Re: RANGES (Might be nice to allow 206 response to range request
- Re: Comment on PEP draft
- Re: Issue: BYTE-RANGE (Is the right meta-data returned on range
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
Saturday, 17 May 1997
Friday, 16 May 1997
- Re: PEP Integration in RTSP
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- PEP Integration in RTSP
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: WEB->FAX
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: WEB->FAX
- Re: WEB->FAX
- FREE LISTING in Worldwide Directory
Thursday, 15 May 1997
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- WEB->FAX
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Announcement: A new Wiley book on World Wide Web Security
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-http-jaye-trust-state-00.txt
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: draft-daviel-metadata-link-00.txt
- draft-daviel-metadata-link-00.txt
Wednesday, 14 May 1997
- Re: feature negotiation syntax
- Rewrite of feature tag syntax rules
- Re: feature negotiation syntax
- Re: feature negotiation syntax
- Re: feature negotiation syntax
- references to obsolete RFC1522
- Document Action: Use and interpretation of HTTP version numbers to Informational
Tuesday, 13 May 1997
- Re: feature negotiation syntax
- Re: feature negotiation syntax
- Re: feature negotiation syntax
- Re: feature negotiation syntax
Monday, 12 May 1997
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- Re: feature negotiation syntax
- RANGES (Might be nice to allow 206 response to range request without knowing total content length)
- Issue: 304-LAST-MODIFIED (Should 304 include Last Modified?)
- Issue: BYTE-RANGE (Is the right meta-data returned on range requests?)
- Re: Issue: BYTE-RANGE -- resolved?
- Re: NUDGE: Our piece on Host: and URLs (Fwd)
- Re: NUDGE: Our piece on Host: and URLs (Fwd)
- request for input of managing WWW-servers.
- Re: NUDGE: Our piece on Host: and URLs (Fwd)
- Re: NUDGE: Our piece on Host: and URLs (Fwd)
- Re: NUDGE: Our piece on Host: and URLs (Fwd)
Saturday, 10 May 1997
- Re: NUDGE: Our piece on Host: and URLs (Fwd)
- Re: NUDGE: Our piece on Host: and URLs (Fwd)
- Re: NUDGE: Our piece on Host: and URLs (Fwd)
- Re: NUDGE: Our piece on Host: and URLs (Fwd)
- Re: NUDGE: Our piece on Host: and URLs (Fwd)
- Re: NUDGE: Our piece on Host: and URLs (Fwd)
Friday, 9 May 1997
- Issue: BYTE-RANGE -- resolved?
- "versions" -> Informational RFC
- Re: New feature negotiation syntax
- RE: New feature negotiation syntax
Thursday, 8 May 1997
Wednesday, 7 May 1997
- Re: Indexing non-HTML objects
- Re: Indexing non-HTML objects
- from the AD: content-length is invalid within multipart
Tuesday, 6 May 1997
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: ftp URL stuff (was MIME multipart/* vs HTTP)
- RE: Indexing non-HTML objects
- Re: Indexing non-HTML objects
- Re: ftp URL stuff (was MIME multipart/* vs HTTP)
- Re: FTP urls
- ftp URL stuff (was MIME multipart/* vs HTTP)
- Re: Indexing non-HTML objects
- Re: FTP urls
- New feature negotiation syntax
- FTP urls
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-http-state-man-mec-01.txt, .ps
Monday, 5 May 1997
Saturday, 3 May 1997
- Re: Accept header and inline images
- Re: Indexing non-HTML objects
- Re: IPP> Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: Indexing non-HTML objects
- Re: Indexing non-HTML objects
- Accept header and inline images
- Re: Indexing non-HTML objects
- Re: Indexing non-HTML objects
Friday, 2 May 1997
- Slight wording error in section 13.5.4
- Re: IPP>PRO - http comments
- Re: IPP>PRO - http comments
- Re: Indexing non-HTML objects
Thursday, 1 May 1997
- Re: IPP>PRO - http comments
- Re: New PEP draft available as ID!
- RE: New PEP draft available as ID!
- Re: IPP>PRO - http comments
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- announcing: http-state mailing list
- Re: Comments on PEP draft
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: HTTP State Management Mechanism (Rev1): EndSession attribute
- Re: HTTP State Management Mechanism (Rev1): EndSession attribute
- Re: HTTP State Management Mechanism (Rev1): EndSession attribute
- RE: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: IPP>PRO - http comments
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
Wednesday, 30 April 1997
- Re: New PEP draft available as ID!
- Re: New PEP draft available as ID!
- RE: New PEP draft available as ID!
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: IPP> MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: IPP> MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: IPP>PRO - http comments
- RE: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- MIME multipart/* vs HTTP
- Re: HTTP State Management Mechanism (Rev1): EndSession attribute
- Comments on PEP draft
Tuesday, 29 April 1997
- Re: State management
- Re: State management
- State management
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-http-pep-03.txt
- RE: HTTP State Management Mechanism (Rev1): EndSession attribute
- RE: HTTP State Management Mechanism (Rev1): EndSession attribute
- RE: HTTP State Management Mechanism (Rev1): EndSession attribute
Monday, 28 April 1997
Tuesday, 29 April 1997
Sunday, 27 April 1997
Friday, 25 April 1997
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: A linguistic note on unverifiable transactions
- Re: Issues-list item "DISPOSITION"
- Re: A linguistic note on unverifiable transactions
- Re: A linguistic note on unverifiable transactions
Thursday, 24 April 1997
- Re: Issues-list item "DISPOSITION"
- Re: A linguistic note on unverifiable transactions
- A linguistic note on unverifiable transactions
- Re: Back from the grave: Unverifiable Transactions and Cookies
- Back from the grave: Unverifiable Transactions and Cookies
Wednesday, 23 April 1997
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Issues-list item "QZERO"
- RE: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Issues-list item "DISPOSITION"
- Re: Issues-list item "DISPOSITION"
Tuesday, 22 April 1997
Wednesday, 23 April 1997
Tuesday, 22 April 1997
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Origin Servers without Clocks
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Issues-list item "QZERO"
- Re: Issues-list item "DISPOSITION"
- Origin Servers without Clocks
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- WARNINGS issue (was Re: draft minutes, HTTP-WG meetings April 7)
- Re: Issues-list item "DISPOSITION"
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
- Re: Pipelining and compression effect on HTTP/1.1 proxies
Sunday, 20 April 1997
Monday, 21 April 1997
- Re: mid-course errors
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- backoff (Re: 1xx Clarification)
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- "last call": draft-ietf-http-versions-01.txt
Saturday, 19 April 1997
Friday, 18 April 1997
Thursday, 17 April 1997
- Re: no one supports Digest
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- no one supports Digest
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Memphis followup
- Re: privacy platforms
- RE: Digest Authentication, Netscape, and Microsoft
- RE: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- RE: 1xx Clarification
- Re: Digest Authentication, Netscape, and Microsoft
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
Wednesday, 16 April 1997
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- RE: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- RE: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: HTTP practice and Year-2000: the bad(?) news
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: HTTP practice and Year-2000: the bad(?) news
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: mid-course errors
- Re: mid-course errors
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- RE: 1xx Clarification
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- Re: Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
Tuesday, 15 April 1997
- Issues-list item "CACHING-CGI"
- RE: 1xx Clarification
- Re: Digest Authentication, Netscape, and Microsoft
- Re: mid-course errors
- Re: mid-course errors
- Re: Digest Authentication, Netscape, and Microsoft
- Re: Digest Authentication, Netscape, and Microsoft
- RE: mid-course errors
- Re: Digest Authentication, Netscape, and Microsoft
- Re: Digest Authentication, Netscape, and Microsoft
- Insisting on a message digest (rfc2069)
- Re: mid-course errors
- Re: mid-course errors
- Re: mid-course errors
- RE: 1xx Clarification
- Re: FW: Proposed amendment to RFC2109
- RE: mid-course errors
- RE: 1xx Clarification
- privacy platforms
- RE: 1xx Clarification
- Re: Digest Authentication, Netscape, and Microsoft
- RE: mid-course errors
- Re: Digest Authentication, Netscape, and Microsoft
Monday, 14 April 1997
- Re: HTTP/1.1 Pipelining
- Re: HTTP/1.1 Pipelining
- Digest Authentication, Netscape, and Microsoft
- Re: SSL tunneling status
- Re: HTTP practice and Year-2000: the bad(?) news
- Re: mid-course errors
- New Proposed Chunked Rules
- SSL tunneling status
- Re: mid-course errors
- mid-course errors
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Re: HTTP/1.1 Pipelining
Sunday, 13 April 1997
- Re: Change to Chunk Length Syntax
- Re: draft minutes, HTTP-WG meetings April 7
- Re: HTTP/1.1 Pipelining
Saturday, 12 April 1997
Friday, 11 April 1997
- Re: ID: Proxy autoconfig
- HTTP practice and Year-2000: the bad(?) news
- Re: HTTP/1.1 Pipelining
- Re: chunked enc. (Was: Re: draft minutes, HTTP-WG meetings April 7)
- Re: ID: Proxy autoconfig
- RE: chunked enc. (Was: Re: draft minutes, HTTP-WG meetings April 7)
- chunked enc. (Was: Re: draft minutes, HTTP-WG meetings April 7)
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- HTTP/1.1 Pipelining
- Re: 1xx Clarification
- Change to Chunk Length Syntax
- draft minutes, HTTP-WG meetings April 7
Thursday, 10 April 1997
Friday, 11 April 1997
Thursday, 10 April 1997
Tuesday, 8 April 1997
- 1xx Clarification
- RE: ID: Proxy autoconfig
- Re: ID: Proxy autoconfig
- RE: ID: Proxy autoconfig
- RE: ID: Proxy autoconfig
Monday, 7 April 1997
- RE: HTTP/1.1-TCP interactions (was Re: HTTP Connection Management(draft-ietf-http-connection-00.txt))
- HTTP/1.1-TCP interactions (was Re: HTTP Connection Management(draft-ietf-http-connection-00.txt))
- Re: Request for HTML Draft to support Multi Direction languages.
Sunday, 6 April 1997
Saturday, 5 April 1997
- Can I add a link to your site from mine?
- Re: Request for HTML Draft to support Multi Direction languages.
Sunday, 6 April 1997
Saturday, 5 April 1997
Friday, 4 April 1997
- Re: FW: Proposed amendment to RFC2109
- Updated Issues list...
- Administrivia: running on automatic
- Re: FW: Proposed amendment to RFC2109
- Re: Proposed amendment to RFC2109
- FW: Proposed amendment to RFC2109
- Proposed amendment to RFC2109
Wednesday, 2 April 1997
- Re: Process for closing out issues list
- Call for Papers - 11th Unicode Conference - September 1997, California
- Re: Ignore proxy
- Re: Ignore proxy
- Re: Ignore proxy
- Ignore proxy