ietf-http-wg@w3.org from April to June 2011 by author

Adam Barth

• Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Thursday, 2 June)
• Re: #295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) (Saturday, 28 May)
• Re: #295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) (Friday, 27 May)

Adrian Custer

• Re: Possible erratum in Part 1, section 9.4. (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Possible erratum in Part 1, section 9.4. (Wednesday, 22 June)

Adrien de Croy

• Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header (Monday, 20 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Thursday, 9 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Thursday, 9 June)
• Re: 9.9 CONNECT (Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate?) (Tuesday, 31 May)
• Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP (Thursday, 12 May)
• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Tuesday, 10 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Thursday, 5 May)
• Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies (Thursday, 14 April)
• Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies (Thursday, 14 April)
• Re: API Rate Limits and HTTP Code [#255] (Tuesday, 5 April)

Alexey Melnikov

• [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-melnikov-mime-default-charset-00.txt] (Tuesday, 14 June)
• [Fwd: Document Action: 'Moving DIGEST-MD5 to Historic' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-kitten-digest-to-historic-04.txt)] (Monday, 2 May)

Amos Jeffries

• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #231: Considerations for new headers (Wednesday, 29 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Thursday, 23 June)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 23 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Wednesday, 22 June)

Andreas Petersson

• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 23 June)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 28 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 28 April)
• Re: IPv6 and draft-petersson-forwarded-for (Tuesday, 26 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Tuesday, 19 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Monday, 18 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)
• I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)

Anne van Kesteren

• Redirects and headers (Tuesday, 28 June)

Arun Ranganathan

• Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF (Friday, 13 May)
• Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF (Friday, 13 May)
• Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF (Thursday, 12 May)

Ben Adida

• Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)

Ben Niven-Jenkins

• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Wednesday, 11 May)
• Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)

Bjoern Hoehrmann

• Re: Possible erratum in Part 1, section 9.4. (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF (Friday, 13 May)
• Re: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc5987bis-00.txt (Friday, 15 April)

Breno de Medeiros

• Re: [apps-discuss] [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Wednesday, 8 June)

Brian Pane

• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Sunday, 26 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Sunday, 26 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt (Thursday, 2 June)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt (Wednesday, 1 June)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt (Saturday, 28 May)
• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Tuesday, 10 May)
• Re: About draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-01.txt (Thursday, 5 May)
• Re: About draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-01.txt (Wednesday, 27 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)

Brian Smith

• Re: [TLS] Revised TLS Charter (Monday, 23 May)

Cameron Heavon-Jones

• Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code (Tuesday, 5 April)
• Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code (Tuesday, 5 April)
• Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code (Monday, 4 April)

Dan Wing

• RE: IPv6 and draft-petersson-forwarded-for (Tuesday, 26 April)
• IPv6 and draft-petersson-forwarded-for (Tuesday, 26 April)

Daniel Stenberg

• Re: Whitespace before responses (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 2 May)

Dave CROCKER

• Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Thursday, 2 June)

David Morris

• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Saturday, 9 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Friday, 8 April)

Dzonatas Sol

• Re: status code for header fields to big (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Monday, 27 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Friday, 10 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Friday, 10 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Thursday, 9 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Thursday, 9 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Sunday, 5 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Saturday, 4 June)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt (Wednesday, 1 June)
• Re: 9.9 CONNECT (Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate?) (Tuesday, 31 May)
• 9.9 CONNECT (Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate?) (Tuesday, 31 May)
• Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Monday, 30 May)
• Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Sunday, 29 May)
• Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Saturday, 28 May)
• Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Saturday, 28 May)
• Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP (Monday, 16 May)
• Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF (Friday, 13 May)
• Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF (Friday, 13 May)
• Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP (Friday, 13 May)
• Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF (Thursday, 12 May)
• Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP (Thursday, 12 May)
• Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP (Thursday, 12 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Saturday, 7 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Friday, 6 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Friday, 6 May)
• Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)

Eran Hammer-Lahav

• RE: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Thursday, 2 June)
• RE: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Wednesday, 1 June)
• RE: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Friday, 20 May)
• HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Monday, 9 May)
• BCP for returning HTTP Authentication (2617) Error Status (questions from the OAuth WG) (Monday, 9 May)
• Realm requirements (issue 177) (Wednesday, 6 April)

Eric Lawrence

• RE: #295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) (Saturday, 28 May)

Fred Bohle

• RE: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 22 June)

Herbert van de Sompel

• New version of Memento I-D (Friday, 3 June)
• New version of the Memento Internet Draft (Thursday, 28 April)

Internet-Drafts@ietf.org

• I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-httpbis-authscheme-registrations-01.txt (Monday, 9 May)
• I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-14.txt (Monday, 18 April)
• I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-14.txt (Monday, 18 April)
• I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-14.txt (Monday, 18 April)
• I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-14.txt (Monday, 18 April)
• I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-14.txt (Monday, 18 April)
• I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-14.txt (Monday, 18 April)
• I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-14.txt (Monday, 18 April)

Jamie Lokier

• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Wednesday, 11 May)

Jan Starke

• Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header (Tuesday, 14 June)

Julian Reschke

• status code for header fields to big (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #231: Considerations for new headers (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #231: Considerations for new headers (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #231: Considerations for new headers (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation (Wednesday, 29 June)
• Re: #283: Set expectations around buffering (Wednesday, 29 June)
• Re: #283: Set expectations around buffering (Tuesday, 28 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Monday, 27 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Thursday, 23 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: Possible erratum in Part 1, section 9.4. (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: API Rate Limits and HTTP Code [#255] (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: Content-Disposition status (Tuesday, 21 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Saturday, 18 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Fwd: RFC 6266 on Use of the Content-Disposition Header Field in the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) (Monday, 6 June)
• Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Tuesday, 31 May)
• Content-Disposition status (Friday, 27 May)
• Re: Ticket #294, was: 403 description clarifications (Friday, 27 May)
• Re: Ticket #294, was: 403 description clarifications (Wednesday, 25 May)
• Ticket #294, was: 403 description clarifications (Wednesday, 25 May)
• Re: #186: Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy (Tuesday, 24 May)
• Re: #186: Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy (Monday, 23 May)
• Re: Location, fragments, and when not to use them (Thursday, 19 May)
• Location, fragments, and when not to use them (Wednesday, 18 May)
• Re: BCP for returning HTTP Authentication (2617) Error Status (questions from the OAuth WG) (Wednesday, 11 May)
• Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: p6 -14 version and ticket #274 (Thursday, 28 April)
• httpbis -14 drafts (Monday, 18 April)
• Re: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc5987bis-00.txt (Sunday, 17 April)
• Fwd: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc5987bis-00.txt (Saturday, 16 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: Issue 178 (Content-MD5), was: Prague Minutes (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)
• Issue 178 (Content-MD5), was: Prague Minutes (Wednesday, 6 April)
• Fwd: RFC 6202 on Known Issues and Best Practices for the Use of Long Polling and Streaming in Bidirectional HTTP (Wednesday, 6 April)
• Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code (Monday, 4 April)
• Re: ABNF for Authorization header not quite right (Friday, 1 April)
• Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code (Friday, 1 April)

Karl Dubost

• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 29 June)
• Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Wednesday, 29 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Wednesday, 29 June)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Wednesday, 22 June)
• DNT Header RFC (Friday, 29 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)
• Re: API Rate Limits and HTTP Code [#255] (Tuesday, 5 April)

Manger, James H

• ABNF for Authorization header not quite right (Friday, 1 April)

Mark Baker

• Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses (Thursday, 23 June)
• p6-cache-13; max-age typo, editorial inconsistency (Thursday, 14 April)

Mark Nottingham

• Re: #231: Considerations for new headers (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #231: Considerations for new headers (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: Whitespace before responses (Thursday, 30 June)
• Whitespace before responses (Wednesday, 29 June)
• #231: Considerations for new headers (Wednesday, 29 June)
• Fwd: IESG Statement on Designating RFCs as Historic [#254] (Wednesday, 29 June)
• Re: #283: Set expectations around buffering (Tuesday, 28 June)
• Re: Redirects and headers (Tuesday, 28 June)
• Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Tuesday, 28 June)
• Re: #295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) (Tuesday, 28 June)
• Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses (Tuesday, 28 June)
• Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation (Tuesday, 28 June)
• Re: #283: Set expectations around buffering (Tuesday, 28 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Tuesday, 28 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Tuesday, 28 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 27 June)
• #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Sunday, 26 June)
• #297: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Sunday, 26 June)
• Fwd: HTTPBIS - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 81 (Sunday, 26 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Thursday, 23 June)
• Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses (Thursday, 23 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 22 June)
• #288: Considering messages in isolation (Wednesday, 22 June)
• #283: Set expectations around buffering (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #186: Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Wednesday, 22 June)
• #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses (Wednesday, 22 June)
• #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Last Call for HTML5 in the W3C (Friday, 17 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Friday, 10 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: [apps-discuss] [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: RFC 6266 on Use of the Content-Disposition Header Field in the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) (Monday, 6 June)
• Quebec City (Monday, 6 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Sunday, 5 June)
• p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Friday, 3 June)
• Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Thursday, 2 June)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt (Thursday, 2 June)
• Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Thursday, 2 June)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt (Wednesday, 1 June)
• Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 31 May)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt (Tuesday, 31 May)
• #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Tuesday, 31 May)
• Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Tuesday, 31 May)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt (Tuesday, 31 May)
• Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Monday, 30 May)
• Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Monday, 30 May)
• Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Sunday, 29 May)
• 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Saturday, 28 May)
• Re: #295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) (Saturday, 28 May)
• Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt (Saturday, 28 May)
• Re: #186: Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy (Friday, 27 May)
• Re: #291: Cache Extensions can override no-store, etc. (Friday, 27 May)
• Re: #289: "understanding" methods (Friday, 27 May)
• Re: #117: cache invalidation upon update (Friday, 27 May)
• Re: [#38] httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers (Friday, 27 May)
• #295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) (Friday, 27 May)
• Re: #186: Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy (Tuesday, 24 May)
• #291: Cache Extensions can override no-store, etc. (Friday, 20 May)
• Re: #292: Pragma (Friday, 20 May)
• Re: Location, fragments, and when not to use them (Thursday, 19 May)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-http-browser-hints-00.txt (Tuesday, 17 May)
• Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-http-browser-hints-00.txt (Tuesday, 17 May)
• Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF (Friday, 13 May)
• Media Fragments spec and HTTP (Thursday, 12 May)
• #292: Pragma (Thursday, 12 May)
• Re: BCP for returning HTTP Authentication (2617) Error Status (questions from the OAuth WG) (Thursday, 12 May)
• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Wednesday, 11 May)
• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Wednesday, 11 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Thursday, 5 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Thursday, 5 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Thursday, 5 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Thursday, 5 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Thursday, 5 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Wednesday, 4 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Wednesday, 4 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Wednesday, 4 May)
• Clarifying Pragma's introduction (Wednesday, 4 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Wednesday, 4 May)
• #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Wednesday, 4 May)
• #289: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Wednesday, 4 May)
• Re: httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers (Wednesday, 4 May)
• Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: HTTP Draft-p1 and http scheme definition (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Monday, 2 May)
• #186: Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: HTTP Draft-p1 and http scheme definition (Monday, 2 May)
• #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses (Monday, 2 May)
• #117: cache invalidation upon update (Monday, 2 May)
• Heuristics and "negative caching" (Thursday, 28 April)
• [#38] httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers (Wednesday, 27 April)
• Re: httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers (Wednesday, 27 April)
• Issues addressed in the -14 drafts (Wednesday, 27 April)
• Re: p6-cache-13; max-age typo, editorial inconsistency (Wednesday, 27 April)
• Re: About draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-01.txt (Wednesday, 27 April)
• Re: About draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-01.txt (Tuesday, 26 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Tuesday, 19 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Monday, 18 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Saturday, 9 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Saturday, 9 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Friday, 8 April)
• SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Thursday, 7 April)
• Re: API Rate Limits and HTTP Code [#255] (Tuesday, 5 April)
• Prague Minutes (Monday, 4 April)
• #20: Default charsets for text media types (Monday, 4 April)

Martin J. Dürst

• Re: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc5987bis-00.txt (Sunday, 17 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: #20: Default charsets for text media types (Monday, 4 April)

Matt Domsch

• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)

Matthew Cox

• If-Range and cache validation using Last-Modified (Friday, 3 June)

mike amundsen

• Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code (Tuesday, 5 April)
• Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code (Tuesday, 5 April)
• Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code (Tuesday, 5 April)
• Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code (Monday, 4 April)
• Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code (Friday, 1 April)
• Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code (Friday, 1 April)
• Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code (Friday, 1 April)

Mike Belshe

• Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies (Saturday, 16 April)

Moore, Jonathan (CIM)

• RE: httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers (Wednesday, 27 April)
• RE: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Thursday, 7 April)

Mykyta Yevstifeyev

• Re: HTTP Draft-p1 and http scheme definition (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: HTTP Draft-p1 and http scheme definition (Monday, 2 May)
• HTTP Draft-p1 and http scheme definition (Sunday, 1 May)
• Re: p6 -14 version and ticket #274 (Thursday, 28 April)
• p6 -14 version and ticket #274 (Thursday, 28 April)

Nico Williams

• Re: [apps-discuss] [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Wednesday, 8 June)
• RE: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)

Paul E. Jones

• RE: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Thursday, 9 June)
• RE: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Thursday, 9 June)
• RE: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Wednesday, 8 June)
• RE: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)
• RE: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)

Peter Saint-Andre

• Fwd: Second Last Call: <draft-hammer-hostmeta-16.txt> (Web Host Metadata) to Proposed Standard (Tuesday, 21 June)

Poul-Henning Kamp

• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #231: Considerations for new headers (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #231: Considerations for new headers (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #297: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Sunday, 26 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Sunday, 26 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header (Monday, 20 June)
• Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header (Monday, 20 June)
• Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header (Monday, 20 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Friday, 10 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Friday, 10 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Thursday, 9 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Thursday, 9 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Thursday, 9 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Thursday, 9 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt (Tuesday, 31 May)
• Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt (Tuesday, 31 May)
• Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP (Thursday, 12 May)
• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Tuesday, 10 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Thursday, 5 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Wednesday, 4 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Wednesday, 4 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Wednesday, 4 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Wednesday, 4 May)
• Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 28 April)
• Re: httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers (Wednesday, 27 April)
• httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers (Tuesday, 26 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Tuesday, 19 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Tuesday, 19 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Saturday, 9 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Thursday, 7 April)

Randy Fischer

• Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Wednesday, 8 June)

Roy T. Fielding

• Re: status code for header fields to big (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Monday, 30 May)
• Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? (Sunday, 29 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Thursday, 5 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Thursday, 5 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Thursday, 5 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Wednesday, 4 May)
• Re: Clarifying Pragma's introduction (Wednesday, 4 May)

Stephen Farrell

• Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Friday, 3 June)
• Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Wednesday, 1 June)

Thomas Maslen

• RE: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Saturday, 25 June)

Thomson, Martin

• RE: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• RE: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• RE: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• RE: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• RE: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• RE: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)

Tim

• Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Thursday, 9 June)
• Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme (Tuesday, 7 June)

William A. Rowe Jr.

• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Friday, 6 May)

Willy Tarreau

• Re: status code for header fields to big (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #231: Considerations for new headers (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #231: Considerations for new headers (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: Whitespace before responses (Thursday, 30 June)
• Re: Whitespace before responses (Wednesday, 29 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 29 June)
• Re: #297: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Sunday, 26 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Saturday, 25 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT (Friday, 24 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header (Monday, 20 June)
• Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header (Monday, 20 June)
• Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header (Monday, 20 June)
• Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header (Monday, 20 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Wednesday, 8 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Tuesday, 7 June)
• Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests (Saturday, 4 June)
• Re: Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-http-browser-hints-00.txt (Tuesday, 17 May)
• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Wednesday, 11 May)
• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Wednesday, 11 May)
• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Wednesday, 11 May)
• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Wednesday, 11 May)
• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Wednesday, 11 May)
• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Tuesday, 10 May)
• Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Tuesday, 10 May)
• On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages (Tuesday, 10 May)
• Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] (Wednesday, 4 May)
• Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries (Tuesday, 3 May)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Monday, 2 May)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 28 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 28 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 28 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Tuesday, 19 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Tuesday, 19 April)
• Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies (Friday, 15 April)
• Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies (Thursday, 14 April)
• Talking HTTPS to proxies (Thursday, 14 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Saturday, 9 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Saturday, 9 April)
• Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching (Saturday, 9 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Saturday, 9 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Friday, 8 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)
• Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt (Thursday, 7 April)

Yngve N. Pettersen (Developer Opera Software ASA)

• Re: Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt (Saturday, 28 May)

Yves Lafon

• Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 (Thursday, 23 June)
• Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses (Thursday, 23 June)
• Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses (Wednesday, 22 June)
• Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP (Thursday, 19 May)

陈智昌

• Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies (Thursday, 14 April)
• Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies (Thursday, 14 April)

Last message date: Thursday, 30 June 2011 23:34:42 UTC