ietf-http-wg@w3.org from April to June 2012 by date

Friday, 29 June 2012

• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Alexey Melnikov
• Re: #271: use of "may" and "should" Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 28 June 2012

• ietf-http-wg@w3.org Dang Van

Wednesday, 27 June 2012

• Re: WGLC #354 - ETags & conditional requests Julian Reschke
• Dang Van a annulé l'événement « Webinar: Agile: Kanban or Scrum? When to Use Which and How to Get the Best of Both ». Dang Van
• Fwd: Status of draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-04.txt Alexey Melnikov
• Re: WGLC #363: rare cases John Sullivan
• Vous êtes invité à l’événement « Webinar: Agile: Kanban or Scrum? When to Use Which and How to Get the Best of Both ». Dang Van
• Re: WGLC #363: rare cases Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #363: rare cases Amos Jeffries
• Re: WGLC #354 - ETags & conditional requests Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 26 June 2012

• Re: WGLC #363: rare cases Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #363: rare cases John Sullivan
• RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Patrick McManus
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Mark Nottingham
• Re: Advice to define where new status codes can be generated Mark Nottingham
• Re: Advice to define where new status codes can be generated Julian Reschke
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Roberto Peon
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Mark Nottingham
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 陈智昌
• RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Robert Mattson
• RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 陈智昌
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Mark Nottingham
• Re: Advice to define where new status codes can be generated Mark Nottingham

Monday, 25 June 2012

• RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Bjoern Hoehrmann
• RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: New Version Notification for draft-montenegro-httpbis-speed-mobility-02.txt Gabriel Montenegro
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Patrick McManus
• RE: #271: use of "may" and "should" Musatov, Martin - CW
• Re: 451 Unavailable For Legal Reasons Dereq Dereq
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: Advice to define where new status codes can be generated Julian Reschke
• #350: WGLC Issue for p4: Optionality of Conditional Request Support Mark Nottingham
• Advice to define where new status codes can be generated Mark Nottingham

Sunday, 24 June 2012

• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Mark Nottingham
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: #271: use of "may" and "should" Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• #271: use of "may" and "should" Julian Reschke
• Re: #271: SHOULD review in p7 Julian Reschke
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Poul-Henning Kamp
• WGLC #363: rare cases Mark Nottingham
• Re: #271: SHOULD review in p7 Mark Nottingham

Saturday, 23 June 2012

• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Martin Nilsson
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Roberto Peon
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Roberto Peon
• Re: #271: SHOULD review in p4 Julian Reschke
• Re: #271: SHOULD review in p5 Julian Reschke
• Re: #271: SHOULD review in p7 Julian Reschke
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-montenegro-httpbis-speed-mobility-02.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: WGLC #354 - ETags & conditional requests Mark Nottingham
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Mark Nottingham
• RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Mark Nottingham
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Mike Belshe
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Martin Nilsson
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Roy T. Fielding
• RE: New Version Notification for draft-montenegro-httpbis-speed-mobility-02.txt Gabriel Montenegro

Friday, 22 June 2012

• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Mike Belshe
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Poul-Henning Kamp
• RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Poul-Henning Kamp
• RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Karl Dubost
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Roberto Peon
• RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 陈智昌
• Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-montenegro-httpbis-speed-mobility-02.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: WGLC #354 - ETags & conditional requests John Sullivan
• may/should Julian Reschke
• #271: SHOULD review in p7 Mark Nottingham
• #271: SHOULD review in p5 Mark Nottingham
• #271: SHOULD review in p4 Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #354 - ETags & conditional requests Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 21 June 2012

• Re: WGLC #354 - ETags & conditional requests John Sullivan
• Re: WGLC #354 - ETags & conditional requests Zhong Yu
• Re: #347: clarify that 201 can imply *multiple* resources were created Julian Reschke
• Re: #347: clarify that 201 can imply *multiple* resources were created Mark Nottingham
• Re: #361: ABNF requirements for recipients [was: #307 untangle Cache-Control ABNF] Julian Reschke
• Re: #347: clarify that 201 can imply *multiple* resources were created Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Julian Reschke
• Re: #347: clarify that 201 can imply *multiple* resources were created Julian Reschke
• WGLC #354 - ETags & conditional requests Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Mark Nottingham
• #347: clarify that 201 can imply *multiple* resources were created Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Amos Jeffries
• Call for Expressions of Interest in Proposals for HTTP/2.0 and New HTTP Authentication Schemes Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 20 June 2012

• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Mark Nottingham
• Re: #361: ABNF requirements for recipients [was: #307 untangle Cache-Control ABNF] Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges David Morris
• Re: #361: ABNF requirements for recipients [was: #307 untangle Cache-Control ABNF] Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Yutaka OIWA
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Yutaka OIWA
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Yutaka OIWA
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Yutaka OIWA
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Yutaka OIWA
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Amos Jeffries
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 19 June 2012

• New Version Notification for draft-montenegro-httpbis-speed-mobility-02.txt Rob Trace
• Re: #361: ABNF requirements for recipients [was: #307 untangle Cache-Control ABNF] Mark Nottingham
• #361: ABNF requirements for recipients [was: #307 untangle Cache-Control ABNF] Julian Reschke
• #367: ABNF requirements for recipients [was: #307 untangle Cache-Control ABNF] Mark Nottingham
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Mark Nottingham
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Mark Nottingham

Monday, 18 June 2012

• Multi-legged Authentication for HTTP Multiplexing Jonathan Silvera

Sunday, 17 June 2012

• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke

Friday, 15 June 2012

• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Tim Bray
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Ross Nicoll
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Cullen Jennings
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt John Sullivan
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Julian Reschke
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: inv-maxage Cache-Control directive syntax, was: Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Julian Reschke
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Tim Bray

Thursday, 14 June 2012

• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Mark Nottingham
• Re: inv-maxage Cache-Control directive syntax, was: Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Mark Nottingham
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Albert Lunde
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Yutaka OIWA
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Julian Reschke
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Nicolas Mailhot
• inv-maxage Cache-Control directive syntax, was: Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Julian Reschke
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Mark Nottingham
• #360 (advice on defining new cache directives), was: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Mark Nottingham
• Re: enc: URL scheme wrong string
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: Forward proxies and CDN/mirrors Jack Bates
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Willy Tarreau
• RE: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Manger, James H
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Mark Nottingham
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: enc: URL scheme Mark Nottingham
• Re: enc: URL scheme Carsten Bormann
• Re: Comments on draft-oiwa-httpbis-auth-extension-00 Yutaka OIWA
• Vancouver in July Mark Nottingham
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 13 June 2012

• enc: URL scheme Kornel Lesiński
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Amos Jeffries
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Mark Nottingham
• 451 Unavailable For Legal Reasons Jacob Appelbaum
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Willy Tarreau
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Ross Nicoll
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Tim Bray
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Tim Bray
• Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-farrell-httpbis-hoba-00.txt Stephen Farrell
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt John Sullivan
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Mark Nottingham
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Mark Nottingham
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Mark Nottingham
• Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Stephen Farrell
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt J Ross Nicoll
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Willy Tarreau
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Roy T. Fielding
• Re: [httpauth] Mutual authentication proposal Yutaka OIWA
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Mark Nottingham
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Tim Bray
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 12 June 2012

• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt James M Snell
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Julian Reschke
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Tim Bray
• Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt John Sullivan
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Tim Bray
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Mark Nottingham
• Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-00.txt Tim Bray
• Re: Proposing Status Codes James M Snell
• Re: Proposing Status Codes Mark Nottingham
• Re: Fwd: Proposing Status Codes Amos Jeffries
• Fwd: Proposing Status Codes James M Snell
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Amos Jeffries
• Re: Proposing Status Codes Roberto Peon
• Re: Proposing Status Codes Amos Jeffries

Monday, 11 June 2012

• Proposing Status Codes Mark Nottingham
• Re: Significantly reducing headers footprint Willy Tarreau
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Mark Nottingham
• RE: Status code for censorship? Musatov, Martin - CW
• Re: Status code for censorship? Mark Nottingham
• Re: Status code for censorship? Mark Nottingham
• Re: Significantly reducing headers footprint patrick mcmanus
• Re: SPDY Review Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Status code for censorship? John Sullivan
• Re: Significantly reducing headers footprint Willy Tarreau
• Re: Significantly reducing headers footprint Willy Tarreau
• Re: Status code for censorship? Carsten Bormann
• Re: Status code for censorship? Julian Reschke
• Re: Significantly reducing headers footprint Martin Nilsson
• Re: Status code for censorship? Martin Nilsson
• Re: SPDY Review Martin Nilsson
• Re: SPDY Review Martin Nilsson
• Re: Status code for censorship? David Morris
• Re: Status code for censorship? Tim Bray
• RE: Status code for censorship? Musatov, Martin - CW
• Re: Status code for censorship? Julian Reschke
• Re: Status code for censorship? James M Snell
• Re: Status code for censorship? Tim Bray
• Re: Status code for censorship? James M Snell
• Re: Significantly reducing headers footprint Mike Belshe
• Fwd: I-D Action: draft-melnikov-httpbis-scram-auth-00.txt Alexey Melnikov
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Julian Reschke
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Amos Jeffries
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Mark Nottingham
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Mark Nottingham
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Mark Nottingham
• Re: Status code for censorship? Yi, EungJun
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Mark Nottingham
• Re: Status code for censorship? Mark Nottingham
• Re: Status code for censorship? Karl Dubost
• Re: Status code for censorship? Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Significantly reducing headers footprint Willy Tarreau

Sunday, 10 June 2012

• Re: Significantly reducing headers footprint Roberto Peon
• Re: Status code for censorship? Mark Nottingham
• Significantly reducing headers footprint Willy Tarreau
• Re: Explicit Proxy (draft-rpeon-httpbis-exproxy) Roberto Peon
• Re: Status code for censorship? Tim Bray
• Re: Status code for censorship? Stephane Bortzmeyer
• Re: Status code for censorship? Yoav Nir
• #307 (untangle Cache-Control ABNF) Julian Reschke
• Re: Status code for censorship? James M Snell
• Comments on draft-oiwa-httpbis-auth-extension-00 Alexey Melnikov
• Re: Status code for censorship? David Morris
• Re: #346: Registry policies Julian Reschke
• Re: Status code for censorship? J Ross Nicoll
• Explicit Proxy (draft-rpeon-httpbis-exproxy) Yoav Nir
• RE: Status code for censorship? Yoav Nir
• Re: Status code for censorship? Martin Thomson
• Status code for censorship? Tim Bray

Saturday, 9 June 2012

• Re: SPDY Review Mike Belshe

Friday, 8 June 2012

• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Karl Dubost
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Mark Nottingham
• Re: SPDY Review Mike Belshe
• Re: SPDY Review Martin Nilsson
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Rajeev Bector
• Re: SPDY Review Mike Belshe
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Martin Thomson
• Re: SPDY Review Martin Nilsson
• Re: SPDY Review Martin Nilsson
• Re: SPDY Review Martin Nilsson
• Re: SPDY Review Martin Nilsson
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Amos Jeffries
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Julian Reschke
• Re: #346: Registry policies Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Mark Nottingham
• Re: #247: "intended usage" in our registries Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Julian Reschke
• #247: "intended usage" in our registries Mark Nottingham
• Re: #346: Registry policies Mark Nottingham
• Re: multiplexing different hosts on a single SSL connections Roberto Peon
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Mark Nottingham
• WGLC #357: Authentication Exchanges Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Mark Nottingham
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Mark Nottingham
• Reminder: Proposals for HTTP/2.0, Authentication Schemes Due Mark Nottingham
• Re: multiplexing different hosts on a single SSL connections Safruti, Ido
• Re: multiplexing different hosts on a single SSL connections Roberto Peon
• Re: multiplexing over more than one connection Robert Mattson
• Re: multiplexing over more than one connection Yuchung Cheng
• Re: SPDY Review Mike Belshe
• multiplexing different hosts on a single SSL connections Safruti, Ido
• Re: multiplexing over more than one connection Mike Belshe
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Mike Belshe
• multiplexing over more than one connection Safruti, Ido

Thursday, 7 June 2012

• Re: Proposal for cache control of pushed streams Alek Storm
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Alek Storm
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Roberto Peon
• Re: SPDY Review Roberto Peon
• Proposal for cache control of pushed streams Alek Storm
• Re: SPDY Review 陈智昌
• Re: httpbis-method-registrations Julian Reschke
• Re: httpbis-method-registrations William A. Rowe Jr.
• Re: httpbis-method-registrations Julian Reschke
• httpbis-method-registrations William A. Rowe Jr.
• Re: SPDY Review Alek Storm
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Safruti, Ido
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Patrick McManus
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Rajeev Bector
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull 陈智昌
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Peter Saint-Andre
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Martin Thomson
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull 陈智昌
• Re: SPDY Review Julian Reschke
• Re: SPDY Review Martin Thomson
• SPDY Review Martin Nilsson
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Amos Jeffries
• RE: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Manger, James H
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Alek Storm
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Alek Storm
• Re: Some thoughts on server push and client pull Mike Belshe
• Some thoughts on server push and client pull Gabriel Montenegro

Wednesday, 6 June 2012

• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Martin Thomson
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope David Morris

Tuesday, 5 June 2012

• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Julian Reschke
• Re: [httpauth] Mutual authentication proposal Yutaka OIWA
• Re: [httpauth] Mutual authentication proposal Amos Jeffries
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope David Morris

Monday, 4 June 2012

• Re: #295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) Julian Reschke
• Re: #160: Redirects and non-GET methods Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Martin Thomson
• Re: WGLC issue: following HTTP redirects Julian Reschke
• Re: Accept-Language language tag order Julian Reschke
• Re: Accept-Language language tag order Julian Reschke
• RE: WGLC #349: "strength" Musatov, Martin - CW
• Re: WGLC issue: following HTTP redirects Peter Saint-Andre
• Re: WGLC issue: following HTTP redirects Peter Saint-Andre
• Re: Accept-Language language tag order Julian Reschke

Saturday, 28 April 2012

• Accept-Language language tag order Gordon P. Hemsley

Thursday, 31 May 2012

• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" James French

Monday, 4 June 2012

• [httpauth] Mutual authentication proposal Yutaka OIWA
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Stephen Farrell
• Re: FYI: LCI -02 Mark Nottingham
• Re: FYI: LCI -02 Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: FYI: LCI -02 Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" David Morris
• RE: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Manger, James H
• Re: FYI: LCI -02 Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Mark Nottingham

Saturday, 2 June 2012

• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Amos Jeffries
• Re: FYI: LCI -02 Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Julian Reschke
• Terminology: "credentials" Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC issue: following HTTP redirects Julian Reschke

Friday, 1 June 2012

• WGLC issue: following HTTP redirects Peter Saint-Andre
• Fwd: Last Call: RFC 2818 (HTTP Over TLS) to Proposed Standard Alexey Melnikov
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Martin Thomson
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Mark Nottingham
• FYI: LCI -02 Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Ludin, Stephen

Thursday, 31 May 2012

• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Alexey Melnikov
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Martin Thomson
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope David Morris
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" David Morris
• RE: WGLC #349: "strength" Musatov, Martin - CW
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Alexey Melnikov
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Stephen Farrell
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Alexey Melnikov
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Yutaka OIWA
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Stephen Farrell
• Re: WGLC #348: Realms and scope Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC #349: "strength" Julian Reschke
• WGLC #349: "strength" Mark Nottingham
• WGLC #348: Realms and scope Mark Nottingham
• WGLC #353: Multiple Values in Cache-Control headers Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 24 May 2012

• New version of Memento I-D Herbert van de Sompel
• Re: add GETAJAX verb/method in http protocol Amos Jeffries
• [ietf-http-wg] <none> Dang Thi Thu van

Wednesday, 23 May 2012

• Re: part 2, 5.1 "the response payload is a representation of the target resource" Julian Reschke
• RE: part 2, 5.1 "the response payload is a representation of the target resource" Musatov, Martin - CW
• Re: part 2, 5.1 "the response payload is a representation of the target resource" Bjoern Hoehrmann

Tuesday, 22 May 2012

• RE: add GETAJAX verb/method in http protocol Musatov, Martin - CW
• Re: add GETAJAX verb/method in http protocol Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: add GETAJAX verb/method in http protocol J Ross Nicoll
• 404 Not Found Dang Thi Thu van
• MIT PGP Key Server -- Email Help Dang Thi Thu van
• Re: add GETAJAX verb/method in http protocol Poul-Henning Kamp
• add GETAJAX verb/method in http protocol Christian RIGONI

Monday, 21 May 2012

• http-auth: Mutual - drafts updated Yutaka OIWA
• Re: Forward proxies and CDN/mirrors Mark Nottingham

Saturday, 19 May 2012

• Forward proxies and CDN/mirrors Jack Bates

Tuesday, 15 May 2012

• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1 John Sullivan
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1 Willy Tarreau
• Improving page retrieval time Robert Mattson

Monday, 14 May 2012

• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1 Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: [apps-discuss] WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Andreas Petersson
• Re: [apps-discuss] WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Andreas Petersson
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1 John Sullivan
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1 Andreas Petersson

Friday, 11 May 2012

• Fwd: I-D Action: draft-designteam-weirds-using-http-00.txt Julian Reschke

Wednesday, 9 May 2012

• Belated WGLC review of p6 (caching) Alexey Melnikov
• Re: Review of draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-19.txt Mark Nottingham
• Re: Review of draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-19.txt Amos Jeffries

Tuesday, 8 May 2012

• Re: Review of draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-19.txt Amos Jeffries
• Re: Review of draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-19.txt Adrien W. de Croy
• Review of draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-19.txt Alexey Melnikov
• Review of draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-19.txt Alexey Melnikov

Monday, 7 May 2012

• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Peter Lepeska

Sunday, 6 May 2012

• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Amos Jeffries
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1 Amos Jeffries

Friday, 4 May 2012

• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Peter Lepeska
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Andreas Petersson
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Peter Lepeska
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 6 ABNF Andreas Petersson
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Andreas Petersson
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.2 Andreas Petersson
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1 Andreas Petersson

Thursday, 3 May 2012

• "SAML V2.0 Metadata Extensions for Login and Discovery User Interface" Albert Lunde
• RE: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP Authentication Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com

Wednesday, 2 May 2012

• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication Nicolas Mailhot
• RE: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP Authentication lionel.morand@orange.com
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Willy Tarreau
• Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Mark Nottingham
• Re: Fwd: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Willy Tarreau
• Re: Fwd: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 6 ABNF Amos Jeffries
• Re: Fwd: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.2 Amos Jeffries
• Re: Fwd: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1 Amos Jeffries
• Re: Fwd: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Amos Jeffries
• Amazon.com - Your Cancellation (12-612-4143) order-update@amazon.com

Tuesday, 1 May 2012

• Fwd: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt Mark Nottingham
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP Authentication Mark Nottingham
• RE: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP Authentication lionel.morand@orange.com
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP Authentication Mark Nottingham

Monday, 30 April 2012

• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication 陈智昌
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication Peter Lepeska
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication 陈智昌
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication Peter Lepeska
• Fwd: RFC 6585 on Additional HTTP Status Codes Julian Reschke
• RE: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP Authentication lionel.morand@orange.com

Saturday, 28 April 2012

• Re: #290: Motivate one-year limit for Expires Mark Nottingham
• Re: #290: Motivate one-year limit for Expires Mark Baker
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication James M Snell

Friday, 27 April 2012

• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication Nicolas Mailhot
• RE: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP Authentication lionel.morand@orange.com
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication Willy Tarreau
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication Mark Nottingham
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication Willy Tarreau
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication James M Snell
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication Mark Nottingham
• Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication James M Snell
• Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 26 April 2012

• CORRECTION: WG Action: RECHARTER: Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis (httpbis) IESG Secretary

Wednesday, 25 April 2012

• Re: Last-Modified header in 304 and 206 responses Mark Nottingham
• #266: Header Microsyntax Mark Nottingham
• #340: Tolerating CR Mark Nottingham
• #322: Origin Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC issue: P4 - ETags & conditional requests Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC issue: P6 - Multiple values in Cache-Control headers Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 24 April 2012

• Re: Comments/Issues on P1 Ben Niven-Jenkins
• Re: Comments/Issues on P1 Mark Nottingham
• Re: Comments/Issues on P1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: Comments/Issues on P1 Amos Jeffries
• IETF 83 - rough minutes Mark Nottingham
• Re: Comments/Issues on P1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: Comments/Issues on P1 Amos Jeffries

Monday, 23 April 2012

• Re: WGLC issue: P4 - ETags & conditional requests Roy T. Fielding
• Comments/Issues on P1 Ben Niven-Jenkins
• WGLC issue: P6 - Multiple values in Cache-Control headers Ben Niven-Jenkins
• WGLC issue: P4 - ETags & conditional requests Ben Niven-Jenkins

Wednesday, 18 April 2012

• Re: HTTP status code for "response too large" Jan Algermissen
• Re: Some proxy needs Anthony Bryan
• Re: HTTP status code for "response too large" Jan Algermissen
• Re: HTTP status code for "response too large" Julian Reschke
• Re: HTTP status code for "response too large" Mark Nottingham
• Re: HTTP status code for "response too large" Cyrus Daboo
• Re: HTTP status code for "response too large" Julian Reschke
• Re: HTTP status code for "response too large" Cyrus Daboo
• Re: HTTP status code for "response too large" Julian Reschke
• HTTP status code for "response too large" Andreas Maier

Monday, 16 April 2012

• Review of draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-19.txt Alexey Melnikov

Sunday, 15 April 2012

• Re: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Roberto Peon
• Re: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency 陈智昌
• Re: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Roberto Peon

Saturday, 14 April 2012

• Re: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency 陈智昌
• Re: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Roberto Peon
• Re: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Carsten Bormann
• Re: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Willy Tarreau
• Re: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency 陈智昌
• Re: Last-Modified header in 304 and 206 responses Amos Jeffries

Friday, 13 April 2012

• RE: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Roberto Peon
• RE: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Roberto Peon
• Re: Last-Modified header in 304 and 206 responses Zhong Yu
• Re: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Salvatore Loreto
• RE: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com
• Re: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Salvatore Loreto
• Re: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Roberto Peon
• Re: Last-Modified header in 304 and 206 responses Amos Jeffries
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Amos Jeffries
• Re: Portal authorization Amos Jeffries
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Amos Jeffries

Thursday, 12 April 2012

• Re: 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Zhong Yu
• 2.0 and Radio Impacts/battery efficiency Salvatore Loreto

Wednesday, 11 April 2012

• FalseStart - another protocol tweak that failed Mike Belshe

Tuesday, 10 April 2012

• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Salvatore Loreto
• Re: Re[2]: Some proxy needs Roberto Peon
• Re: Some proxy needs Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Re[2]: Some proxy needs Per Buer
• Re: Portal authorization Julian Reschke
• Re: Portal authorization Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Re[2]: Some proxy needs Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Portal authorization Julian Reschke
• Re: Portal authorization Julian Reschke
• Re: Re[2]: Some proxy needs Per Buer
• Re: Portal authorization (was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Portal authorization (was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Re[2]: Some proxy needs Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Nicolas Mailhot
• Portal authorization (was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Martin J. Dürst

Monday, 9 April 2012

• Re: Re[2]: Some proxy needs Per Buer
• Re: Some proxy needs Eliot Lear
• Re: Some proxy needs Mark Nottingham
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Jamie Lokier

Sunday, 8 April 2012

• Re: Re[2]: Some proxy needs Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Re[2]: Some proxy needs Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Re[2]: Some proxy needs Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Some proxy needs Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Re[2]: Some proxy needs Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Re[2]: Some proxy needs Nicolas Mailhot
• Re[2]: Some proxy needs Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Some proxy needs Poul-Henning Kamp
• Some proxy needs Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Nicolas Mailhot

Saturday, 7 April 2012

• Re[4]: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Re[2]: multiplexing -- don't do it Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re[2]: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re[2]: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Roberto Peon
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Peter Lepeska
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it David Morris
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Jamie Lokier
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Jamie Lokier
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it tom
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it patrick mcmanus
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it tom
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it tom
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Mike Belshe
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Mike Belshe

Friday, 6 April 2012

• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Ray Polk
• Last-Modified header in 304 and 206 responses Zhong Yu
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Roberto Peon
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) patrick mcmanus
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Daniel Stenberg
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Willy Tarreau
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Willy Tarreau
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Stephen Farrell
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Roberto Peon
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Willy Tarreau
• Re: WGLC Issue for p4: Optionality of Conditional Request Support Ray Polk
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Willy Tarreau
• Re: FYI: CORS Last Call Mark Nottingham
• Re: FYI: CORS Last Call Dirk Pranke
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Stephen Farrell
• RE: multiplexing -- don't do it Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: FYI: CORS Last Call James M Snell
• Re: FYI: CORS Last Call Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Roberto Peon
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• FYI: CORS Last Call Mark Nottingham
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Stephen Farrell
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Stephen Farrell
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Stephen Farrell
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) 陈智昌
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Ray Polk
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Mike Belshe
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) 陈智昌
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Adjusting our spec names Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring Mike Belshe
• Re: HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring David Morris

Thursday, 5 April 2012

• Re: HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring Mike Belshe
• Re: options or protocols? Adrien de Croy
• IETF Dang Thi Thu van
• Re: HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring Carsten Bormann
• Re: HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring Carsten Bormann
• Re: HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring Willy Tarreau
• Re: HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring Willy Tarreau
• Re: HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Jon Leighton
• Re: HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring Mark Nottingham
• RE: HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring Mike Belshe
• HTTP -> Messages -> Transport factoring Mark Nottingham
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Peter Lepeska
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Roberto Peon
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Jon Leighton
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Peter Lepeska
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Peter Lepeska
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Peter Lepeska
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Patrick McManus
• Re: options or protocols? Willy Tarreau
• Re: options or protocols? 陈智昌
• Re: options or protocols? Adrien de Croy
• Re: options or protocols? Willy Tarreau
• Re: options or protocols? Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: options or protocols? Willy Tarreau
• Re: options or protocols? Adrien W. de Croy
• options or protocols? Eliot Lear
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Roberto Peon
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Peter L
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Peter L

Wednesday, 4 April 2012

• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Peter Lepeska
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Peter Lepeska
• Re: SPDY = HTTP/2.0 or not ? Ray Polk
• Re: SPDY = HTTP/2.0 or not ? Mark Nottingham
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Patrick McManus
• Re: SPDY = HTTP/2.0 or not ? Ray
• Re: Backwards compatibility Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Willy Tarreau
• RE: SPDY = HTTP/2.0 or not ? Stefan Lederer
• Re: SPDY = HTTP/2.0 or not ? Alexandre Morgaut
• Re: SPDY = HTTP/2.0 or not ? Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: SPDY = HTTP/2.0 or not ? Karl Dubost
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Willy Tarreau
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Poul-Henning Kamp
• AW: SPDY = HTTP/2.0 or not ? Christopher Müller
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Willy Tarreau
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re[2]: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy

Tuesday, 3 April 2012

• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Roy T. Fielding
• Re: SPDY = HTTP/2.0 or not ? Karl Dubost
• RE: proxy config (was Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Eric Lawrence
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: Proposal to make draft-kucherawy-httpbis-summary a WG document Paul Hoffman
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Ray Polk
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Henry Story
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Stephen Farrell
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it J Ross Nicoll
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Roberto Peon
• Re: Backwards compatibility Roberto Peon
• proxy config (was Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Daniel Stenberg
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Willy Tarreau
• Re[2]: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Backwards compatibility Amos Jeffries
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Stephen Farrell
• Re[2]: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Martin Thomson
• Re[2]: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Amos Jeffries
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it patrick mcmanus

Monday, 2 April 2012

• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Stephen Farrell
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) 陈智昌
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Amos Jeffries
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Stephen Farrell
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Amos Jeffries
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Stephen Farrell
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re: Re[3]: multiplexing -- don't do it Robert Collins
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it patrick mcmanus
• Re[3]: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) 陈智昌
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Amos Jeffries
• Re[2]: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Stephen Farrell
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Robert Collins
• Re: Backwards compatibility 陈智昌
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Mike Belshe
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Roberto Peon
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it J Ross Nicoll
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Stephen Farrell
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mark Nottingham
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Roberto Peon
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Roberto Peon
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Roberto Peon
• Re: breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Roberto Peon
• breaking TLS (Was: Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) Stephen Farrell
• Re: Backwards compatibility Roberto Peon
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Peter Lepeska
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: Backwards compatibility Mike Belshe
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Backwards compatibility Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Backwards compatibility Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Backwards compatibility Mike Belshe
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Mark Nottingham
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mark Nottingham
• Re: Proposal to make draft-kucherawy-httpbis-summary a WG document Ben Niven-Jenkins
• Re: Backwards compatibility Peter Lepeska
• Re: Backwards compatibility Patrick McManus
• Re: Backwards compatibility Mike Belshe
• Re: Backwards compatibility Mike Belshe
• Re: Backwards compatibility Peter Lepeska
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Brian Pane
• Re: Backwards compatibility Mark Watson
• Re: Backwards compatibility Mark Nottingham
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea 陈智昌
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Brian Pane
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Mike Belshe
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Poul-Henning Kamp
• NEW ISSUE: httpbis-p1 updates RFC 2818 as well (editorial) Paul Hoffman
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea イアンフェッティ
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Mike Belshe
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Mike Belshe
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea 陈智昌
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea イアンフェッティ
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Amos Jeffries
• Re: Proposal to make draft-kucherawy-httpbis-summary a WG document Paul Hoffman
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Amos Jeffries
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea 陈智昌
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea 陈智昌
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Willy Tarreau
• Re: Re[2]: multiplexing -- don't do it Willy Tarreau
• RE: Proposal to make draft-kucherawy-httpbis-summary a WG document Murray S. Kucherawy
• Proposal to make draft-kucherawy-httpbis-summary a WG document Paul Hoffman
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Poul-Henning Kamp

Sunday, 1 April 2012

• Re: Adjusting our spec names Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Amos Jeffries
• Re: Adjusting our spec names Roberto Peon
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Peter Lepeska
• Re: Re[4]: multiplexing -- don't do it 陈智昌
• Re[4]: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Re[2]: multiplexing -- don't do it Peter L
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Roberto Peon
• Re[2]: multiplexing -- don't do it Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Protocols, extensions, compatibility 陈智昌
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Willy Tarreau
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea 陈智昌
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Peter Lepeska
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Peter Lepeska
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Willy Tarreau
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Tim Bray
• Re: Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Willy Tarreau
• Ascii-based SPDY "compression" idea Peter Lepeska
• Re: Make HTTP 2.0 message/transport format agnostic Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Adjusting our spec names Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Adjusting our spec names Willy Tarreau
• Re: Adjusting our spec names Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Adjusting our spec names Willy Tarreau
• Re: Adjusting our spec names Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Make HTTP 2.0 message/transport format agnostic Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Adjusting our spec names Willy Tarreau
• Re: Adjusting our spec names Roberto Peon
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Willy Tarreau
• Re: multiplexing -- don't do it Roberto Peon
• Re: Make HTTP 2.0 message/transport format agnostic Tim Bray

Last message date: Friday, 29 June 2012 15:53:31 UTC