ietf-http-wg@w3.org from July to September 2010 by date

Thursday, 30 September 2010

Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Julian Reschke
Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Adam Barth

Wednesday, 29 September 2010

Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Julian Reschke
Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Anne van Kesteren
Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Julian Reschke
Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Anne van Kesteren
403 description clarifications Thomson, Martin

Tuesday, 28 September 2010

WG Action: RECHARTER: Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis (httpbis) IESG Secretary
Re: Issue 141: "should we have an auth scheme registry" Julian Reschke
Re: Issue 141: "should we have an auth scheme registry" Julian Reschke
Re: Issue 141: "should we have an auth scheme registry" Cyrus Daboo

Saturday, 25 September 2010

Re: draft-bryan-metalinkhttp-18.txt Peter Pöml
Re: Link Relation Registry initial contents Julian Reschke
Re: Link Relation Registry initial contents Eric J. Bowman

Friday, 24 September 2010

Re: Link Relation Registry initial contents Julian Reschke

Thursday, 23 September 2010

Specific non-2616 MS RFC implementation William A. Rowe Jr.
Re: Unifying & standardizing X-Moz & X-Purpose headers Roy T. Fielding
Re: Unifying & standardizing X-Moz & X-Purpose headers Adam Barth
Unifying & standardizing X-Moz & X-Purpose headers 蓋文彼德斯
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Dan Winship
Link Relation Registry initial contents Nathan
IANA hanges to draft-nottingham-http-link-header Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 22 September 2010

Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Adam Barth
Re: parsing of unknown challenges, was: Ticket 237 Thomas Broyer
Multiple Content-Type headers (was: Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths) Bjoern Hoehrmann
Re: Multiple content-types, was: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Adam Barth
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Adam Barth
Multiple content-types, was: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Julian Reschke
Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Julian Reschke
Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Anne van Kesteren
Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Julian Reschke
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Bjoern Hoehrmann
Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Anne van Kesteren
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Willy Tarreau
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Julian Reschke
[Fwd: I-D Action:draft-ietf-kitten-digest-to-historic-02.txt] Alexey Melnikov
Re: [#177] Realm required on challenges Julian Reschke
Re: [#177] Realm required on challenges Julian Reschke
Re: parsing of unknown challenges, was: Ticket 237 Julian Reschke
Re: parsing of unknown challenges, was: Ticket 237 Bjoern Hoehrmann
parsing of unknown challenges, was: Ticket 237 Julian Reschke
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Mark Nottingham
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Julian Reschke
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
Re: [#177] Realm required on challenges Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 21 September 2010

Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Julian Reschke
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths 陈智昌
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Adam Barth
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Mark Nottingham
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths 陈智昌
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Roy T. Fielding
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Roy T. Fielding
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths 陈智昌
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Willy Tarreau
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Mark Nottingham
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Roy T. Fielding
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Mark Nottingham

Monday, 20 September 2010

Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Roy T. Fielding
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Roy T. Fielding
Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Julian Reschke
Re: [#232] User-Agent Guidelines (proposal) Anne van Kesteren
Re: [#232] User-Agent Guidelines (proposal) Julian Reschke
Re: New issue: p5-range 5.4.2, proxy recommendations regarding 200 responses to Range Yves Lafon
Re: [#232] User-Agent Guidelines (proposal) Adam Barth
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Mark Nottingham
Re: [#232] User-Agent Guidelines (proposal) Mark Nottingham
Re: [#232] User-Agent Guidelines (proposal) Adam Barth
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Adam Barth
[#232] User-Agent Guidelines (proposal) Mark Nottingham
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Julian Reschke
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Mark Nottingham
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Anne van Kesteren
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Julian Reschke
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Adrien de Croy
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Anne van Kesteren
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Adam Barth
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Mark Nottingham
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Anne van Kesteren
RE: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Thomson, Martin
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Mark Nottingham
RE: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Thomson, Martin
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Willy Tarreau
[#95] Multiple Content-Lengths Mark Nottingham

Sunday, 19 September 2010

Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods) Julian Reschke

Thursday, 16 September 2010

Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-01.txt Julian Reschke
how to handle "Not Yet Available"? Nathan
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-01.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org

Wednesday, 15 September 2010

ticket #78 (Relationship between 401, Authorization and WWW-Authenticate) Julian Reschke
Re: Issue 141: "should we have an auth scheme registry" Cyrus Daboo
Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt Julian Reschke
Re: Issue 141: "should we have an auth scheme registry" Julian Reschke
Re: Protocol switch before, or after the 101 response? Henrik Nordström
Re: Protocol switch before, or after the 101 response? Bjoern Hoehrmann
Re: WG Review: Recharter of Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis (httpbis) Julian Reschke
Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt Bjoern Hoehrmann
Re: Issues addressed in the -10 and -11 drafts Willy Tarreau
Re: Issues addressed in the -10 and -11 drafts Mark Nottingham
Re: WG Review: Recharter of Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis (httpbis) Nathan
Re: WG Review: Recharter of Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis (httpbis) Martin J. Dürst

Tuesday, 14 September 2010

WG Review: Recharter of Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis (httpbis) IESG Secretary
Re: Issues addressed in the -10 and -11 drafts Willy Tarreau
Re: [#177] Realm required on challenges Julian Reschke
Re: Issues addressed in the -10 and -11 drafts Julian Reschke
Re: Issues addressed in the -10 and -11 drafts Willy Tarreau
Re: Issues addressed in the -10 and -11 drafts Mark Nottingham

Monday, 13 September 2010

Issue 141: "should we have an auth scheme registry" Julian Reschke
Issue 195, was: Proposed RFC 2617 erratum, Re: Backwards definition of authentication header Julian Reschke
Re: Ticket 237 (absorbing more of 2617), was: Minutes for Maastricht Julian Reschke
No WG meeting at IETF 79 Mark Nottingham

Sunday, 12 September 2010

Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt Julian Reschke

Saturday, 11 September 2010

Re: Protocol switch before, or after the 101 response? Henrik Nordström
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Henrik Nordström
Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt Bjoern Hoehrmann
Protocol switch before, or after the 101 response? Bjoern Hoehrmann

Wednesday, 8 September 2010

re: effective request URI/target URI, issues 221 & 222, was: Issues addressed, by the -10 drafts =JeffH
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 7 September 2010

Re: effective request URI/target URI, issues 221 & 222, was: Issues addressed by the -10 drafts Mark Nottingham

Monday, 6 September 2010

Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt Henrik Nordström
Re: effective request URI/target URI, issues 221 & 222, was: Issues addressed by the -10 drafts Julian Reschke
Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt Julian Reschke

Sunday, 5 September 2010

Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt Henrik Nordström
Re: POST with empty body Henrik Nordström
Re: remove/deprecate User-Agent header? Henrik Nordström
Re: conditional-request implementation feedback Henrik Nordström

Saturday, 4 September 2010

Issue 123 (factor out Content-Disposition), was: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt Julian Reschke
Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt Julian Reschke
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org

Friday, 3 September 2010

Re: POST with empty body Nathan
Re: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc2183-in-http-03.txt [ new WG item ] Mark Nottingham
Re: POST with empty body Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 2 September 2010

Re: POST with empty body Willy Tarreau
Re: POST with empty body Jan Algermissen
Re: POST with empty body David Morris
POST with empty body Darrel Miller
Re: Issues addressed in the -10 and -11 drafts Willy Tarreau
Issues addressed in the -10 and -11 drafts Mark Nottingham
Re: New issue: p5-range 5.4.2, proxy recommendations regarding 200 responses to Range Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 1 September 2010

Tuesday, 31 August 2010

IPR Disclosure: CNRS's Statement about IPR related to RFC 4768, RFC 2069, RFC 4169, and draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-11 IETF Secretariat
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Patrick McManus
Fwd: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc2183-in-http-03.txt Julian Reschke
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Mark Nottingham

Sunday, 29 August 2010

Re: New issue: p5-range 5.4.2, proxy recommendations regarding 200 responses to Range Henrik Nordström

Friday, 27 August 2010

Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Julian Reschke
Re: Charter revision Julian Reschke

Thursday, 26 August 2010

Re: Charter revision William A. Rowe Jr.
Issue 241 conditional header eval order, was: conditional-request implementation feedback Julian Reschke
Re: Charter revision Julian Reschke

Wednesday, 25 August 2010

Re: Charter revision William A. Rowe Jr.
Re: Charter revision Henrik Nordström
Re: Charter revision Barry Leiba
Re: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc2183-in-http-02.txt Julian Reschke
Charter revision Mark Nottingham
Issue: expect 100-continue in HTTP/1.0 requests Henrik Nordström

Tuesday, 24 August 2010

Re: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc2183-in-http-02.txt Julian Reschke
Re: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc2183-in-http-02.txt Eric J. Bowman
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Anne van Kesteren
Fwd: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc2183-in-http-02.txt Julian Reschke
conditional-request implementation feedback Eric J. Bowman

Monday, 23 August 2010

Re: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Patrick McManus

Friday, 20 August 2010

Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Adam Barth
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Maciej Stachowiak
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Maciej Stachowiak
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Julian Reschke
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects [#238] Mark Nottingham
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects [#238] Adam Barth
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects [#238] Mark Nottingham
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Dirk Pranke
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Roy T. Fielding

Thursday, 19 August 2010

Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Dirk Pranke
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Roy T. Fielding
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Adam Barth
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Roy T. Fielding
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Robert Sayre
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Adam Barth
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Roy T. Fielding
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Adam Barth
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Roy T. Fielding
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Julian Reschke
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Mark Pauley
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Adam Barth
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Roy T. Fielding
Re: remove/deprecate User-Agent header? Willy Tarreau
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Maciej Stachowiak
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Maciej Stachowiak
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Julian Reschke
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Julian Reschke
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Mark Pauley
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Maciej Stachowiak
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Maciej Stachowiak
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Adam Barth
Re: remove/deprecate User-Agent header? J Ross Nicoll
Re: remove/deprecate User-Agent header? Julian Reschke
Re: remove/deprecate User-Agent header? Paul Wise
Re: remove/deprecate User-Agent header? Julian Reschke
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Julian Reschke
remove/deprecate User-Agent header? Paul Wise
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Anne van Kesteren
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Julian Reschke
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Anne van Kesteren
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Julian Reschke
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Anne van Kesteren
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Julian Reschke
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Yves Lafon
Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Julian Reschke
Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-portal-01.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-portal-00.txt Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 18 August 2010

Re: User confirmation and 307 redirects Robert Sayre
User confirmation and 307 redirects Adam Barth
Re: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-portal-00.txt Dan Winship

Monday, 16 August 2010

Re: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-reschke-basicauth-enc-01.txt Julian Reschke
Re: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-reschke-basicauth-enc-01.txt Anne van Kesteren
Fwd: I-D Action:draft-reschke-basicauth-enc-01.txt Julian Reschke

Friday, 13 August 2010

Thursday, 12 August 2010

Wednesday, 11 August 2010

Fwd: I-D Action:draft-reschke-basicauth-enc-00.txt Julian Reschke
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Willy Tarreau
RE: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Thomson, Martin
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Mark Nottingham
RE: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Thomson, Martin

Tuesday, 10 August 2010

Re: rewritten section on message body and length Roy T. Fielding
Re: Ticket 237 (absorbing more of 2617), was: Minutes for Maastricht Julian Reschke
Re: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Adrien de Croy
RE: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Thomson, Martin
Re: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-00.txt Mark Nottingham

Friday, 6 August 2010

Re: http URI grammar Roy T. Fielding
RE: http URI grammar Daniel Stenberg
RE: http URI grammar Eric Lawrence

Thursday, 5 August 2010

Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-portal-00.txt Stefan Eissing
Fwd: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-portal-00.txt Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 4 August 2010

http URI grammar Yves Lafon
HTTPbis -11 drafts published Julian Reschke
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-11.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-11.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-11.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-11.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-11.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-11.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-11.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
Request for feedback on HTTP Streaming overview (draft-wu-http-streaming-optimization-ps) Alexey Melnikov

Tuesday, 3 August 2010

Re: NEW: #225: PUT and DELETE invalidation vs. staleness Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 29 July 2010

Re: Migrating CONNECT and Upgrade details from RFC2817 Daniel Stenberg
Re: issue 79: must understand content-* header fields or fail Mark Nottingham
Re: Migrating CONNECT and Upgrade details from RFC2817 Willy Tarreau
RE: Migrating CONNECT and Upgrade details from RFC2817 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
Re: disallowing userinfo in http and https URIs Mark Nottingham
Re: NEW: #225: PUT and DELETE invalidation vs. staleness Yves Lafon
Migrating CONNECT and Upgrade details from RFC2817 Mark Nottingham
Re: NEW: #225: PUT and DELETE invalidation vs. staleness Mark Nottingham
Re: NEW: #225: PUT and DELETE invalidation vs. staleness Yves Lafon
Re: Ticket 237 (absorbing more of 2617), was: Minutes for Maastricht Julian Reschke

Wednesday, 28 July 2010

Ticket 237 (absorbing more of 2617), was: Minutes for Maastricht Julian Reschke
Re: disallowing userinfo in http and https URIs Martin J. Dürst
Re: disallowing userinfo in http and https URIs Reto Bachmann-Gmür
sending Last-Modified in 304 and 206 responses Roy T. Fielding
Re: disallowing userinfo in http and https URIs Julian Reschke
rewritten section on Content-Location Roy T. Fielding
Re: disallowing userinfo in http and https URIs Alexey Melnikov
Re: rewritten section on message body and length Willy Tarreau
Re: disallowing userinfo in http and https URIs Mark Baker
rewritten section on message body and length Roy T. Fielding
Re: disallowing userinfo in http and https URIs Adrien de Croy
Re: disallowing userinfo in http and https URIs William A. Rowe Jr.
Re: disallowing userinfo in http and https URIs Adrien de Croy
disallowing userinfo in http and https URIs Roy T. Fielding

Tuesday, 27 July 2010

Minutes for Maastricht Mark Nottingham

Monday, 26 July 2010

Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Roy T. Fielding
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Yves Lafon
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Yves Lafon
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Willy Tarreau
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Moore, Jonathan
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Yves Lafon
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Mark Nottingham
Re: Revised Maastricht Agenda Mark Nottingham
Reminder: HTTPbis WG meeting today Julian Reschke

Sunday, 25 July 2010

Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Moore, Jonathan
Re: proposal for issue #178 Henrik Nordström
RE: #233 - Is * usable as a request-uri for new methods? Thomson, Martin
Re: #233 - Is * usable as a request-uri for new methods? Mark Nottingham

Saturday, 24 July 2010

RE: #233 - Is * usable as a request-uri for new methods? Thomson, Martin
Re: #122 (MIME-Version not listed in P1, general header fields) Julian Reschke
NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Mark Nottingham
Forcing validation Mark Nottingham
Re: NEW: #233 - Is * usable as a request-uri for new methods? Willy Tarreau
NEW: #233 - Is * usable as a request-uri for new methods? Mark Nottingham
Re: [#203] Max-forwards and extension methods Julian Reschke

Friday, 23 July 2010

Issue 208, was: Issues addressed by the -10 drafts Julian Reschke
NEW: #224 - Header Classifications Mark Nottingham
NEW: #223: Allowing heuristic freshness for new status codes Mark Nottingham
NEW: #225: PUT and DELETE invalidation vs. staleness Mark Nottingham
Issue 39, was: Issues addressed by the -10 drafts Julian Reschke
Re: New issue: p5-range 5.4.2, proxy recommendations regarding 200 responses to Range Yves Lafon
A note about the issues list and editorial workflow Mark Nottingham
issue 226, "proxies not supporting certain methods" Julian Reschke
Re: proposal for issue #178 Yves Lafon
Re: Revised Maastricht Agenda Mark Nottingham
Re: effective request URI/target URI, issues 221 & 222, was: Issues addressed by the -10 drafts Roy T. Fielding
effective request URI/target URI, issues 221 & 222, was: Issues addressed by the -10 drafts Julian Reschke

Thursday, 22 July 2010

Re: Issues addressed by the -10 drafts Roy T. Fielding
Issues addressed by the -10 drafts Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 21 July 2010

Re: Issue 146, was: Users with different access rights in HTTP Authentication Roy T. Fielding
Re: Issue 146, was: Users with different access rights in HTTP Authentication Julian Reschke
Re: Issue 146, was: Users with different access rights in HTTP Authentication Willy Tarreau
Re: Revised Maastricht Agenda Julian Reschke
Re: Issue 146, was: Users with different access rights in HTTP Authentication Julian Reschke

Tuesday, 20 July 2010

Re: Issue 146, was: Users with different access rights in HTTP Authentication Roy T. Fielding

Monday, 19 July 2010

Revised Maastricht Agenda Mark Nottingham
Re: Issue 146, was: Users with different access rights in HTTP Authentication Willy Tarreau
Re: Issue 146, was: Users with different access rights in HTTP Authentication William A. Rowe Jr.
Re: Issue 146, was: Users with different access rights in HTTP Authentication Julian Reschke
Re: Issue 146, was: Users with different access rights in HTTP Authentication Roy T. Fielding
Issue 146, was: Users with different access rights in HTTP Authentication Julian Reschke

Friday, 16 July 2010

Re: Clarification on use of Content-Location header Henrik Nordström
Re: Clarification on use of Content-Location header Daniel Stenberg
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Willy Tarreau
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Roy T. Fielding
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Adrien de Croy
RE: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Thomson, Martin
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Willy Tarreau

Thursday, 15 July 2010

Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Roy T. Fielding
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Willy Tarreau
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Roy T. Fielding
Re: Clarification on use of Content-Location header Henrik Nordström
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Willy Tarreau
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Roy T. Fielding
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Mark Nottingham
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Adrien de Croy
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Roy T. Fielding
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Adrien de Croy
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Mark Nottingham
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Adrien de Croy
Re: parsing decimals, was: HTTPbis -10 drafts published Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 14 July 2010

Re: Clarification on use of Content-Location header Daniel Stenberg
Re: [#193] Trailers and intermediaries Julian Reschke
Re: parsing decimals, was: HTTPbis -10 drafts published Willy Tarreau
parsing decimals, was: HTTPbis -10 drafts published Julian Reschke
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header Willy Tarreau
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published Willy Tarreau
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published Julian Reschke
Re: [#193] Trailers and intermediaries Henrik Nordström
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published Willy Tarreau
Re: Clarification on use of Content-Location header Mark Nottingham
Re: Clarification on use of Content-Location header Roy T. Fielding
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published Mark Nottingham
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published Willy Tarreau
Re: Clarification on use of Content-Location header Mark Nottingham
Re: issue 79: must understand content-* header fields or fail Mark Nottingham
Re: HTTPbis -10 drafts published Mark Nottingham
[#203] Max-forwards and extension methods Mark Nottingham
[#193] Trailers and intermediaries Mark Nottingham
Re: [#208] IANA registry for cache-control directives Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 13 July 2010

Re: DRAFT HTTPbis agenda for Maastricht Julian Reschke
HTTPbis -10 drafts published Julian Reschke

Monday, 12 July 2010

I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-method-registrations-04.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-10.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-10.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-10.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-10.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-10.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-10.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-10.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
DRAFT HTTPbis agenda for Maastricht Mark Nottingham

Friday, 9 July 2010

Re: I-D Action:draft-loreto-http-timeout-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: httpbis-p2 : 1xx messages may not always be treated as 100 Willy Tarreau
Re: httpbis-p2 : 1xx messages may not always be treated as 100 Yves Lafon
Re: I-D Action:draft-loreto-http-timeout-00.txt Salvatore Loreto
Re: I-D Action:draft-loreto-http-timeout-00.txt Mark Nottingham
RE: I-D Action:draft-loreto-http-timeout-00.txt Thomson, Martin
Re: I-D Action:draft-loreto-http-timeout-00.txt Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 8 July 2010

Re: NEW: value space of status codes [#213] David Morris
Re: NEW: value space of status codes [#213] Yves Lafon
Re: NEW: value space of status codes [#213] Willy Tarreau
Re: NEW: value space of status codes [#213] Julian Reschke
Re: NEW: value space of status codes [#213] Willy Tarreau
Re: NEW: value space of status codes [#213] Julian Reschke
Re: NEW: value space of status codes [#213] Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 7 July 2010

Re: NEW: value space of status codes [#213] Roy T. Fielding
Re: NEW: value space of status codes [#213] Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 6 July 2010

httpbis-p2 : 1xx messages may not always be treated as 100 Willy Tarreau
RE: I-D Submission: draft-lee-httpext-metadata-00.txt 이문상

Sunday, 4 July 2010

Re: I-D Submission: draft-lee-httpext-metadata-00.txt Eran Hammer-Lahav
RE: I-D Submission: draft-lee-httpext-metadata-00.txt 이문상
RE: I-D Submission: draft-lee-httpext-metadata-00.txt 이문상

Friday, 2 July 2010

RE: I-D Action:draft-loreto-http-timeout-00.txt Thomson, Martin

Thursday, 1 July 2010

Re: Questions (errata?) about caching authenticated responses [#174] Mark Nottingham
Re: I-D Action:draft-loreto-http-timeout-00.txt Mark Nottingham

Last message date: Thursday, 30 September 2010 07:47:39 UTC