NEW ISSUE: weak validator: definition inconsistent
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes (was: Request for review of Turtle (an RDFserialization) media type: text/turtle)
i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
- Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
- Re: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
- Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
i93: Repeating Single-value headers
- Re: i93: Repeating Single-value headers
- Re: i93: Repeating Single-value headers
- Re: i93: Repeating Single-value headers
Issues List -- new location
Draft minutes for Vancouver
WG drafts for partitioned 2616bis
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-00.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-00.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-00.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-00.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-00.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-00.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-00.txt
i15: How to tell if a client does not support persistent connections
- Re: i15: How to tell if a client does not support persistent connections
- Re: i15: How to tell if a client does not support persistent connections
- Re: i15: How to tell if a client does not support persistent connections
- Re: i15: How to tell if a client does not support persistent connections
Content-Location as Base URI
Connection: "close" — Case sensitive or not?
conditional request vs GET (new issue?)
[Fwd: Working Group Last Call: draft-melnikov-digest-to-historic-00.txt]
moving forward with partitioned drafts
Using server-driven negotiation
- Re: Using server-driven negotiation
- Re: Using server-driven negotiation
- Re: Using server-driven negotiation
[NEW ISSUE] Content-Length is a hop-to-hop header
(Re: issue #93) Duplicated headers and security vulnerabilities
[NEW ISSUE] Content-Length and Transfer-Encoding: security implications
- Re: [NEW ISSUE] Content-Length and Transfer-Encoding: security implications
- Re: [NEW ISSUE] Content-Length and Transfer-Encoding: security implications
Agenda updated
Request methods that allow an entity-body
- Re: Request methods that allow an entity-body
i88: 205 Bodies
Objectives of RFC2616bis?
NEW ISSUE: message-body in CONNECT response
- Re: NEW ISSUE: message-body in CONNECT response
- Re: NEW ISSUE: message-body in CONNECT response
- Re: NEW ISSUE: message-body in CONNECT response
- Re: NEW ISSUE: message-body in CONNECT response
- Re: NEW ISSUE: message-body in CONNECT response
Request for review on Access Control for Cross-site Requests
I18N and basic authentication
Re: RFC2616 erratum "languagetag"
- Re: RFC2616 erratum "languagetag"
- Re: RFC2616 erratum "languagetag"
- Re: RFC2616 erratum "languagetag"
Does Reason-Phrase allow LWS?
NEW ISSUE: Transfer-Encoding in 1.0 messages
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Transfer-Encoding in 1.0 messages
Preliminary agenda up
NEW ISSUE: Monitoring Connections text
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Monitoring Connections text
- Re: NEW ISSUE: Monitoring Connections text
NEW ISSUE: empty Host header
request for feedback: RFC2616 BNF name collisions
- Re: request for feedback: RFC2616 BNF name collisions
NEW ISSUE: repeating non-list-type-headers
- Re: NEW ISSUE: repeating non-list-type-headers
NEW ISSUE: status of multipart/byteranges
- Re: NEW ISSUE: status of multipart/byteranges
- Re: NEW ISSUE: status of multipart/byteranges
- i90: status of multipart/byteranges
Intro to Methods making Host header requirement
- Re: Intro to Methods making Host header requirement
Re: i37 - Vary and non-existant headers
- Re: i37 - Vary and non-existant headers
- Re: i37 - Vary and non-existant headers
- Re: i37 - Vary and non-existant headers
status on partitioned drafts
progress on BNF conversion
Re: i31 (qdtext BNF) resolved
i70: cacheability of status 303
i25 - Accept-Encoding BNF [was: Erratum in RFC 2616]
Accepting pre-existing errata resolutions
Vancouver agenda topics
- Re: Vancouver agenda topics
Editorial Nit: referring to status codes
[i81] Content Negotiation for media types
- RE: [i81] Content Negotiation for media types
- Creating a HTTP "protocol feature set"
Issue 27 (PUT Idempotency)
Re: [i16] Remove 'identity' token references
[i47] inconsistency in date format explanation
draft-sayre-http-security-variance-00.txt, was: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for errata/clarifications to 2617
NOTE WELL - contributions to this mailing list
HTTPBIS - getting started
Semantic meaning of double quotation marks delimiting quoted-string
- Re: Semantic meaning of double quotation marks delimiting quoted-string
- Re: Semantic meaning of double quotation marks delimiting quoted-string
- Re: Semantic meaning of double quotation marks delimiting quoted-string
- Re: Semantic meaning of double quotation marks delimiting quoted-string
- Re: Semantic meaning of double quotation marks delimiting quoted-string
- Re: Semantic meaning of double quotation marks delimiting quoted-string
- Re: Semantic meaning of double quotation marks delimiting quoted-string
- Re: Semantic meaning of double quotation marks delimiting quoted-string
Updated PATCH draft
Re: does no-store request invalidate?
WG Action: Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis WG (httpbis)
RFC2617: section reference erratum
RFC 2616, partitioned
Re: Link Header draft
[new issue] If(-None)-Match still refers to entity
new issue: URI length limitations
Re: new issue: remove redundant MUST obey xrefs
Re: Custom Ranges
Re: NEW ISSUE: normative references
Re: semantic error in RFC 2616
Re: NEW ISSUE: Content-Coding vs ETags
WG Review: HyperText Transport Protocol Bis (httpbis)
- Re: WG Review: HyperText Transport Protocol Bis (httpbis)
- Re: WG Review: HyperText Transport Protocol Bis (httpbis)
- Re: WG Review: HyperText Transport Protocol Bis (httpbis)
- Re: WG Review: HyperText Transport Protocol Bis (httpbis)