First part of LC for draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized summary
Last Call on draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized - summarizing first week
Ликвидация предприятий (по всей Украине )
1st CFP: IJCAI-11 Workshop on Discovering Meaning On the Go in Large & Heterogeneous Data (LHD-11)
Re: Last Call: <draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized-08.txt> ('Headers-Not-Recognized' HTTP Header Field) to Experimental RFC
Re: Last Call: <draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized-08.txt> ('Headers-Not-Recognized' HTTP Header Field) to Experimental RFC
- Re: Last Call: <draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized-08.txt> ('Headers-Not-Recognized' HTTP Header Field) to Experimental RFC
- Re: Last Call: <draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized-08.txt> ('Headers-Not-Recognized' HTTP Header Field) to Experimental RFC
- Re: Last Call: <draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized-08.txt> ('Headers-Not-Recognized' HTTP Header Field) to Experimental RFC
- Re: Last Call: <draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized-08.txt> ('Headers-Not-Recognized' HTTP Header Field) to Experimental RFC
- Re: Last Call: <draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized-08.txt> ('Headers-Not-Recognized' HTTP Header Field) to Experimental RFC
Re: [saag] [apps-discuss] [websec] [kitten] HTTP authentication: the next generation
Pipelining hinting
Re: [saag] [websec] [kitten] [apps-discuss] HTTP authentication: the next generation
The new version of draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized (Last Call)
- Re: The new version of draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized (Last Call)
Re: [http-auth] [websec] HTTP authentication: the next generation
Re: [http-auth] [websec] [kitten] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
LC comments on draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized-08.txt
Fwd: Content-Disposition and IE
Re: [saag] [websec] [kitten] [apps-discuss] HTTP authentication: the next generation
Re: [http-auth] [saag] [websec] [kitten] HTTP authentication: the next generation
Fwd: Last Call: <draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized-08.txt> ('Headers-Not-Recognized' HTTP Header Field) to Experimental RFC
Re: [websec] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
Updated Content-Disposition error handling proposal on the wiki
- Re: Updated Content-Disposition error handling proposal on the wiki
- Re: Updated Content-Disposition error handling proposal on the wiki
Re: [kitten] [apps-discuss] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [kitten] [apps-discuss] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [kitten] [apps-discuss] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [kitten] [apps-discuss] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [apps-discuss] [kitten] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [apps-discuss] [kitten] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [websec] [apps-discuss] [kitten] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [websec] [apps-discuss] [kitten] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [websec] [apps-discuss] [kitten] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [saag] [websec] [apps-discuss] [kitten] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [saag] [websec] [apps-discuss] [kitten] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [websec] [saag] [apps-discuss] [kitten] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [saag] [websec] [apps-discuss] [kitten] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [saag] [websec] [apps-discuss] [kitten] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [saag] [websec] [apps-discuss] [kitten] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [websec] [apps-discuss] [kitten] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [apps-discuss] [kitten] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [kitten] [apps-discuss] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [kitten] [apps-discuss] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
Fwd: [websec] request for feedback on adoption of drafts to WG - until Dec-16
Re: [kitten] [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [saag] HTTP authentication: the next generation
- Re: [websec] HTTP authentication: the next generation
Same Origin Policy and HTTP Authentication
TAG resolution on redirection with fragment identifiers
workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
- Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized-01.txt
Re: draft-bryan-metalinkhttp-18.txt
Please Review my Internet-Draft
- Re: Please Review my Internet-Draft
Fwd: Last Call: <draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-18.txt> (HTTP State Management Mechanism) to Proposed Standard
Multiple Realm Authentication?
WWW-Authenticate / Proxy-Authenticate with 200 response
- Re: WWW-Authenticate / Proxy-Authenticate with 200 response
- Re: WWW-Authenticate / Proxy-Authenticate with 200 response
Memento Internet Draft
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-04.txt
link for subscribing HTTP streaming mailing list
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-authscheme-registrations-00.txt
Content-Disposition next steps
- Re: Content-Disposition next steps
P7: IANA registry for schemes (issue 141)
Meeting room change for HTTP streaming Bar BOF
Fw: [httpstreaming] Agenda and Slides
#243: iso-8859-1 in C-D
Comments on Section 6.1
Identifying the Resource Associated with a Representation?
- Re: Identifying the Resource Associated with a Representation?
Content-Location on 200 responses
Issue 265: Clarify that C-D spec does not apply to multipart upload
Fw: [httpstreaming] Time and location for HTTP streaming bar BoF
[#259] Handling invalid Content-Dispostion headers
- RE: [#259] Handling invalid Content-Dispostion headers
- Re: [#259] Handling invalid Content-Dispostion headers
- Re: [#259] Handling invalid Content-Dispostion headers
- Re: [#259] Handling invalid Content-Dispostion headers
- Re: [#259] Handling invalid Content-Dispostion headers
Fwd: I-D Action:draft-zong-httpstreaming-gap-analysis-01.txt
Ticket 262: Discuss whether percent-decoding should also be done by receivers.
- Re: Ticket 262: Discuss whether percent-decoding should also be done by receivers.
TICKET 259: 'treat as invalid' not defined
- Re: TICKET 259: 'treat as invalid' not defined
- Re: TICKET 259: 'treat as invalid' not defined
- Re: TICKET 259: 'treat as invalid' not defined
- Re: TICKET 259: 'treat as invalid' not defined
- Re: TICKET 259: 'treat as invalid' not defined
Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Ticket 260: multiple disposition types, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
- Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp
Fwd: RFC 5988 on Web Linking
API Rate Limits and HTTP Code
- Re: API Rate Limits and HTTP Code [#255]
Issue 240: Migrate Upgrade details from RFC2817
Call for feedback: HTML application cache
Re: issue 226, "proxies not supporting certain methods"
Re: [#203] Max-forwards and extension methods
Re: Proposal: 205 Bodies [#88]
- Re: Proposal: 205 Bodies [#88]
- Re: Proposal: 205 Bodies [#88]
- #251 (connect bodies), was: Proposal: 205 Bodies [#88]
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- RE: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- RE: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
- Re: #250 / #251 (connect bodies)
httpbis -12 drafts
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-12.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-12.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-12.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-12.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-03.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-12.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-12.txt
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-12.txt
Re: [#193] Trailers and intermediaries
chunk-extensions
Re: NEW: #225: PUT and DELETE invalidation vs. staleness
Re: ticket #78 (Relationship between 401, Authorization and WWW-Authenticate)
fyi: draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-15.txt
Content Auto-negotiation
#233: Is * usable as a request-uri for new methods?
#229: Considerations for registering new status codes
#230: Considerations for registering new methods
- Re: #230: Considerations for registering new methods
- Re: #230: Considerations for registering new methods
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses
Re: CONNECT command with message body
Re: NEW ISSUE: message-body in CONNECT response
Re: [#177] Realm required on challenges
Fwd: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
- Re: Does no-store in request imply no-cache?
Working Group Last Call: Content-Disposition
- Issue 245 (percent escaping), was: Working Group Last Call: Content-Disposition
- Issue 244 (repeated parameters), was: Working Group Last Call: Content-Disposition
Which headers to apply from a PUT request (Link?)
Re: Unifying & standardizing X-Moz & X-Purpose headers
- Re: Unifying & standardizing X-Moz & X-Purpose headers
- Re: Unifying & standardizing X-Moz & X-Purpose headers
Issue 248: client "Date" requirements
Making 307 redirects permantent, Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods)
Date format glitch
Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
- Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths
Re: Issue 141: "should we have an auth scheme registry"
Content-Disposition
%encoding in filename parameters. Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: %encoding in filename parameters. Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
The robustness principle, as view by user agent implementors (Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02)
- Re: The robustness principle, as view by user agent implementors (Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02)
- Re: The robustness principle, as view by user agent implementors (Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02)
- Re: The robustness principle, as view by user agent implementors (Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02)
- Re: The robustness principle, as view by user agent implementors (Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02)
- Re: The robustness principle, as view by user agent implementors (Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02)
- Re: The robustness principle, as view by user agent implementors (Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02)
- Re: The robustness principle, as view by user agent implementors (Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02)
Extending redirects to suggest updated locations ?
- Re: Extending redirects to suggest updated locations ?
- Re: Extending redirects to suggest updated locations ?
- Re: Extending redirects to suggest updated locations ?
- Re: Extending redirects to suggest updated locations ?
Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- %encoding in filename parameters. Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- detecting support for percent encoding in C-D, was: repeated filename parameters
- Re: detecting support for percent encoding in C-D, was: repeated filename parameters
- Re: detecting support for percent encoding in C-D, was: repeated filename parameters
- Re: detecting support for percent encoding in C-D, was: repeated filename parameters
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02