Sunday, 31 December 2006
Saturday, 30 December 2006
- RE: Large content size value
- Re: Large content size value
- RE: RE: NEW ISSUE: 13.1.2's Definition of 1xx Warn-Codes
Friday, 29 December 2006
- RE: Large content size value
- Large content size value [was: RE: Use of 1*DIGIT
- RE: Use of 1*DIGIT
- RE: Use of 1*DIGIT
- Re: Use of 1*DIGIT
- RE: RE: NEW ISSUE: 13.1.2's Definition of 1xx Warn-Codes
- RE: RE: NEW ISSUE: 13.1.2's Definition of 1xx Warn-Codes
- RE: NEW ISSUE: 13.1.2's Definition of 1xx Warn-Codes
Thursday, 28 December 2006
- RE: RE: NEW ISSUE: 13.1.2's Definition of 1xx Warn-Codes
- RE: NEW ISSUE: 13.1.2's Definition of 1xx Warn-Codes
- RE: NEW ISSUE: 13.1.2's Definition of 1xx Warn-Codes
- RE: NEW ISSUE: 13.1.2's Definition of 1xx Warn-Codes
- RE: NEW ISSUE: 13.1.2's Definition of 1xx Warn-Codes
Wednesday, 27 December 2006
- RE: NEW ISSUE: 13.1.2's Definition of 1xx Warn-Codes
- RE: NEW ISSUE: 13.1.2's Definition of 1xx Warn-Codes
Friday, 22 December 2006
- NEW ISSUE: 13.1.2's Definition of 1xx Warn-Codes
- RE: Allow is not in 13.5.2
- RE: Allow is not in 13.5.2
- RE: Allow is not in 13.5.2
- RE: Use of 1*DIGIT
- RE: Use of 1*DIGIT
- Re: Use of 1*DIGIT
Thursday, 21 December 2006
- RE: Use of 1*DIGIT
- NEW ISSUE: Sort 1.3 Terminology
- RE: Allow is not in 13.5.2
- Use of 1*DIGIT
- RE: Intent of 14.38 Server
- RE: Intent of 14.38 Server
- RE: Intent of 14.38 Server
- RE: Intent of 14.38 Server
- Re: Allow is not in 13.5.2
- RE: Intent of 14.38 Server
- Re: Allow is not in 13.5.2
- RE: Intent of 14.38 Server
- RE: NEW ISSUE: date formats in BNF and spec text, was: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- Allow is not in 13.5.2
- Intent of 14.38 Server
- RE: NEW ISSUE: date formats in BNF and spec text, was: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
Wednesday, 20 December 2006
- Re: NEW ISSUE: date formats in BNF and spec text, was: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- RE: NEW ISSUE: date formats in BNF and spec text, was: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- RE: NEW ISSUE: date formats in BNF and spec text, was: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- Re: NEW ISSUE: date formats in BNF and spec text, was: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- Re: NEW ISSUE: date formats in BNF and spec text, was: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- Re: NEW ISSUE: date formats in BNF and spec text, was: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- Re: NEW ISSUE: date formats in BNF and spec text, was: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
Tuesday, 19 December 2006
- RE: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- Re: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- RE: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- RE: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- NEW ISSUE: date formats in BNF and spec text, was: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- Re: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- Re: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- RE: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
- RE: Content-Location in Requests
- Re: RFC 2616 Errata: Misc. Typos
Monday, 18 December 2006
Friday, 15 December 2006
- Re: RFC 2616 Errata: 14.11 Content Encoding
- Re: NEW ISSUE: editorial bug in 13.5.1
- Re: Content-Location in Requests
Thursday, 14 December 2006
- Content-Location in Requests
- RFC 2616 Errata: 14.11 Content Encoding
- Re: NEW ISSUE: editorial bug in 13.5.1
- Re: NEW ISSUE: editorial bug in 13.5.1
Wednesday, 13 December 2006
Tuesday, 12 December 2006
Monday, 11 December 2006
Sunday, 10 December 2006
Saturday, 9 December 2006
Tuesday, 5 December 2006
- Re: RFC2616bis question: is the reference to RFC1123 normative?
- PATCH method
- RFC2616bis question: is the reference to RFC1123 normative?
- RE: ERR header (NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location)
Monday, 4 December 2006
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
Sunday, 3 December 2006
- RE: ERR header (NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location)
- RE: Etag-on-write, draft -04
- Re: ERR header (NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location)
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
- Re: ERR header (NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location)
- Re: ERR header (NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location)
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
Saturday, 2 December 2006
- Re: ERR header (NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location)
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
- Re: ERR header (NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location)
- NEW ISSUE: example for matching functions, was: Weak and strong ETags
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
Friday, 1 December 2006
- Re: Weak and strong ETags
- Re: Weak and strong ETags
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
Thursday, 30 November 2006
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: typo (?) in 14.18, rfc1123-format
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04
- Re: NEW ISSUE: typo (?) in 14.18, rfc1123-format
- Re: NEW ISSUE: inconsistency in date format explanation
- Re: NEW ISSUE: references to RFC1700
- Re: NEW ISSUE: classify RFC977 reference as "informative", and update to RFC3977
- Etag-on-write, draft -04
Wednesday, 29 November 2006
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- RE: ERR header (NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location)
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: typo (?) in 14.18, rfc1123-format
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: Etag-on-write, 5th attempt (== IETF draft 04), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-04.txt
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
- NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location
Tuesday, 28 November 2006
Tuesday, 21 November 2006
Monday, 20 November 2006
Tuesday, 14 November 2006
Sunday, 12 November 2006
- Re: References style in draft-lafon-rfc2616bis
- References style in draft-lafon-rfc2616bis
- NEW ISSUE: references to RFC1700
Friday, 10 November 2006
Tuesday, 7 November 2006
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
Monday, 6 November 2006
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
- Re: DELETE and ETag
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
Sunday, 5 November 2006
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
- Re: DELETE and ETag
- RE: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- RE: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- RE: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
Saturday, 4 November 2006
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- RE: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- RE: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- DELETE and ETag
Thursday, 2 November 2006
Tuesday, 31 October 2006
Saturday, 28 October 2006
Friday, 27 October 2006
Tuesday, 24 October 2006
Monday, 23 October 2006
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt
Sunday, 22 October 2006
- Re: security requirements
- Re: security requirements
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
Friday, 20 October 2006
Sunday, 22 October 2006
Saturday, 21 October 2006
- Re: security requirements
- Re: Enforcement of specifications
- Re: Enforcement of specifications
- Re: Reorganising RFC2616 [was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening]
- Enforcement of specifications
Friday, 20 October 2006
- Re: Reorganising RFC2616 [was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening]
- Re: security requirements
- Reorganising RFC2616 [was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening]
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements
- RE: security requirements
- RE: security requirements
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- RE: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements
- Re: security requirements
- RE: security requirements
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
Thursday, 19 October 2006
Friday, 20 October 2006
Thursday, 19 October 2006
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- ETags vs Variants, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- References in RFC2616, was: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- RE: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
Wednesday, 18 October 2006
- Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-pettersen-cookie-v2-00.txt
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Revising RFC2616 - what's happening
- Re: I-D ACTION:draft-lafon-rfc2616bis-00.txt
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- RE: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- RE: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: security requirements
Tuesday, 17 October 2006
- Re: security requirements
- security requirements (was: Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8)
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
Monday, 16 October 2006
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: Response to appeal by Robert Sayre dated 2006-08-29
- Re: Response to appeal by Robert Sayre dated 2006-08-29
- Re: Response to appeal by Robert Sayre dated 2006-08-29
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: RFC2616 erratum "languagetag"
- Re: RFC2616 erratum "languagetag"
Sunday, 15 October 2006
- Re: RFC2616 erratum "languagetag"
- Re: RFC2616 erratum "languagetag"
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8
- Re: [Ietf-http-auth] Updating RFC 2617 (HTTP Digest) to use UTF-8