Perfect then I'll sit tight. Thanks, Peter On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 5:43 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>wrote: > FYI, we (google spdy team) have been discussing a "trusted proxy" > internally and I think Roberto's got a draft in the works. > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Peter Lepeska <bizzbyster@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hi Mark, >> >> Earlier this group discussed the idea of a "trusted proxy". Does that >> fall under the HTTP/2.0 category? >> >> I may have some cycles for this. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Peter >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 1:28 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: >> >>> Just a reminder that we're still accepting proposals for: >>> >>> 1. HTTP/2.0 >>> 2. New HTTP authentication schemes >>> >>> As per our charter <http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/charter/>. >>> >>> So far, we've received the following proposals applicable to HTTP/2.0: >>> <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/wiki/Http2Proposals> >>> >>> But none yet for authentication schemes: >>> <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/wiki/HttpAuthProposals> >>> >>> As communicated in Paris, the deadline for proposals is 15 June, 2012. >>> It's fine if your proposal isn't complete, but we do need to have a good >>> sense of it by then, for discussion. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -- >>> Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >
Received on Monday, 30 April 2012 21:45:38 UTC