ietf-http-wg@w3.org from July to September 2013 by date

Monday, 30 September 2013

• Re: Issues addressed in the -24 drafts (and getting to IETF Last Call) Ilari Liusvaara
• Re: HTTP/2 extensions and proxies Amos Jeffries
• HTTP/2 extensions and proxies Gábor Molnár
• Re: Agenda for Seattle Interim Mark Nottingham
• Re: Issues addressed in the -24 drafts (and getting to IETF Last Call) Mark Nottingham

Sunday, 29 September 2013

• A question about "Figure 1: Stream States" of the http2 draft. Yi, EungJun

Saturday, 28 September 2013

• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Issues addressed in the -24 drafts (and getting to IETF Last Call) Julian Reschke
• Re: Issues addressed in the -24 drafts (and getting to IETF Last Call) Amos Jeffries

Friday, 27 September 2013

• Re: Issues addressed in the -24 drafts (and getting to IETF Last Call) Ilari Liusvaara
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Leif Hedstrom
• RE: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only RUELLAN Herve
• Re: no-transform & working group last call for -p1 et al Amos Jeffries
• no-transform & working group last call for -p1 et al Eliot Lear

Thursday, 26 September 2013

• Issues addressed in the -24 drafts (and getting to IETF Last Call) Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 25 September 2013

• httpbis -24 drafts Julian Reschke
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-method-registrations-13.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-authscheme-registrations-08.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-24.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-24.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-24.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-24.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-24.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-24.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• RE: Agenda for Seattle Interim Brian Raymor (MS OPEN TECH)

Tuesday, 24 September 2013

• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Mike Bishop
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Roberto Peon
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only James M Snell
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Mike Bishop
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Roberto Peon
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Roberto Peon
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Mike Bishop
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 陈智昌
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Fred Akalin
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only James M Snell
• Re: Removing dropped entry from ref set Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Removing dropped entry from ref set Gábor Molnár
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Daniel Stenberg
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Roberto Peon
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Mike Bishop
• Re: Agenda for Seattle Interim Mark Nottingham
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Willy Tarreau
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Martin Thomson
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Mark Nottingham
• Re: Removing dropped entry from ref set Fred Akalin
• Re: Removing dropped entry from ref set Roberto Peon
• Re: Removing dropped entry from ref set Mike Bishop
• Re: use of Warning in request messages Roy T. Fielding
• Re: #496, was: p6: Warning header field Roy T. Fielding
• Re: Warning code space (p6) Mark Nottingham

Monday, 23 September 2013

• RE: Removing dropped entry from ref set Andrew Rockwell
• Re: Removing dropped entry from ref set Fred Akalin
• Removing dropped entry from ref set Mike Bishop
• FYI: LINK and UNLINK James M Snell
• Re: #496, was: p6: Warning header field Julian Reschke
• Warning code space (p6) Julian Reschke
• #496, was: p6: Warning header field Julian Reschke

Saturday, 21 September 2013

• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only James M Snell
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources 陈智昌
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources Roberto Peon
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Gábor Molnár
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources Jo Liss
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources Roberto Peon
• Re: HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Roberto Peon
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources Patrick McManus
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources Eliot Lear
• HPACK benchmark test for substitution indexing vs incremental indexing only Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources Glen Knowles
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources Roy T. Fielding
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources 陈智昌
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources Roberto Peon
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources 陈智昌
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources Roberto Peon
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources 陈智昌

Friday, 20 September 2013

• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources Roberto Peon
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources Patrick McManus
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources 陈智昌
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources Jo Liss
• Re: Security of cross-origin pushed resources 陈智昌
• Security of cross-origin pushed resources Jo Liss
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Mike Belshe
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Patrick McManus
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Stephen Farrell
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Eliot Lear
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Mark Nottingham
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Willy Tarreau

Sunday, 15 September 2013

• Re: use of Warning in request messages Amos Jeffries

Friday, 20 September 2013

• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 19 September 2013

• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Werner Baumann
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Eric J. Bowman
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Willy Tarreau
• RE: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Manger, James H
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Mike Belshe
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Martin J. Dürst
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Mark Nottingham
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Stephen Farrell
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Martin J. Dürst
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 Fred Akalin
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa

Wednesday, 18 September 2013

• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 Fred Akalin
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 Roberto Peon
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 Fred Akalin
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 Roberto Peon
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Peter Occil
• RE: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 Mike Bishop
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Nicholas Hurley
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 Roberto Peon
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 Fred Akalin
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Eric J. Bowman
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Eliot Lear
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Werner Baumann
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 James M Snell
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Error code for PING frame with wrong size - https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/246 Gábor Molnár
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Roy T. Fielding
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Eliot Lear
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Roberto Peon
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Peter Occil
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 陈智昌
• Re: Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Patrick McManus
• Adding Security Considerations regarding interception to p1 Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 17 September 2013

• #343, was: chunk-extensions Julian Reschke
• Rough agenda for Vancouver Mark Nottingham
• Agenda for Seattle Interim Mark Nottingham
• Re: HTTPbis WG Interim Meeting, October 9-11, 2013 Mark Nottingham
• Error code for PING frame with wrong size - https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/246 陈智昌
• Re: use of Warning in request messages Mark Nottingham
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Mark Nottingham

Monday, 16 September 2013

• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Karl Dubost
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Leif Hedstrom

Sunday, 15 September 2013

• Re: chunk-extensions Julian Reschke
• Re: chunk-extensions Willy Tarreau
• Re: chunk-extensions David Morris
• Re: chunk-extensions Willy Tarreau
• Re: chunk-extensions Julian Reschke
• Re: chunk-extensions Willy Tarreau
• Re: chunk-extensions Julian Reschke
• Re: chunk-extensions Mark Nottingham
• Re: chunk-extensions Willy Tarreau
• Re: chunk-extensions Mark Nottingham

Saturday, 14 September 2013

• Re: #495 WGLC: p4 editorial nits Ken Murchison
• Re: chunk-extensions Julian Reschke
• Re: #495 WGLC: p4 editorial nits Julian Reschke

Friday, 13 September 2013

• Re: chunk-extensions Mark Nottingham
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Roberto Peon
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Martin Thomson
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting James M Snell
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Fred Akalin
• Re: JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 Roberto Peon
• Re: chunk-extensions Daniel Stenberg
• Re: chunk-extensions Roy T. Fielding
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Poul-Henning Kamp
• JavaScript header compressor/decompressor updated to HPACK-03 Fred Akalin
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Karl Dubost
• use of Warning in request messages Roy T. Fielding
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting 陈智昌
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Karl Dubost
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Roy T. Fielding
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Martin Thomson
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Karl Dubost
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting David Morris
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Roy T. Fielding
• Re: [perpass] HTTP user-agent fingerprinting Patrick Pelletier
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions Jeff Pinner
• Re: #495 WGLC: p4 editorial nits Ken Murchison
• #495 WGLC: p4 editorial nits Julian Reschke
• #495 WGLC: p4 editorial nits Julian Reschke
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 12 September 2013

• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions Roy T. Fielding
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions Julian Reschke
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions Roy T. Fielding
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions Julian Reschke
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions Roy T. Fielding
• WGLC: p4 editorial nits Ken Murchison
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions Julian Reschke
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions Julian Reschke
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') Mark Nottingham

Monday, 9 September 2013

• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 陈智昌
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Martin Thomson
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Martin Thomson
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 陈智昌
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Julian Reschke
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Mark Nottingham
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Roy T. Fielding
• Re: HTTPbis WG Interim Meeting, October 9-11, 2013 Mark Nottingham
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Mark Nottingham
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Mark Nottingham
• Re: Wireshark dissector update 陈智昌

Saturday, 7 September 2013

• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Willy Tarreau
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Peter Occil
• Re: Header compresison: unbounded memory use, again Roberto Peon
• Header compresison: unbounded memory use, again Gábor Molnár
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Willy Tarreau
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Willy Tarreau
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Amos Jeffries
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Roy T. Fielding
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Roy T. Fielding

Friday, 6 September 2013

• RE: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Osama Mazahir
• FW: New Version Notification for draft-montenegro-httpbis-http2-server-profiles-00.txt Gabriel Montenegro
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Willy Tarreau
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Martin Thomson
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Ilari Liusvaara
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Martin Thomson
• RE: More header compression comments RUELLAN Herve
• Re: Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Willy Tarreau
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Amos Jeffries
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Willy Tarreau

Thursday, 5 September 2013

• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Martin Thomson
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Willy Tarreau
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Martin Thomson
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Roberto Peon
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Martin Thomson
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Roberto Peon
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Martin Thomson
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Roy T. Fielding
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Roy T. Fielding
• Re: More header compression comments Martin Thomson
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Michael Sweet
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Daniel Stenberg
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Roy T. Fielding
• Re: More header compression comments Gábor Molnár
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Amos Jeffries
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Welzl
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Welzl
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Sébastien Barnoud
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) 陈智昌
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Tuexen
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Nico Williams
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) 陈智昌
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Roberto Peon
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) 陈智昌

Wednesday, 4 September 2013

• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Tuexen
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) 陈智昌
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Tuexen
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Daniel Stenberg
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Roberto Peon
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Tuexen
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Yuchung Cheng
• Re: Wireshark dissector update Ludin, Stephen
• Wireshark dissector update Ludin, Stephen
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers Martin Thomson
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Sébastien BARNOUD
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Martin Thomson
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Mike Belshe
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Roberto Peon
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Yuchung Cheng
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Sébastien BARNOUD
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Daniel Stenberg
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Roberto Peon
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Julian Reschke
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Willy Tarreau
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Mark Nottingham
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Roberto Peon
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Stephen Farrell
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Roberto Peon

Tuesday, 3 September 2013

• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers Martin Thomson
• RE: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers Manger, James H
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Roberto Peon
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers James M Snell
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Willy Tarreau
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Roberto Peon
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Sébastien BARNOUD
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Martin Thomson
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers Martin Thomson
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Willy Tarreau
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Martin Thomson
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers Julian Reschke
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers Martin Thomson
• Re: Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Martin Thomson
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Sébastien BARNOUD
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers Julian Reschke
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Martin Thomson
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Sébastien BARNOUD
• Re: Proposal to measure end-user latency Martin Nilsson
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers Julian Reschke
• Proposal to measure end-user latency Sébastien BARNOUD
• Translating CR LF to HTTP/1 headers Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 Ryan Hamilton
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Julian Reschke
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Julian Reschke
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Mark Nottingham
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Julian Reschke
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Mark Nottingham
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Julian Reschke
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Mark Nottingham
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Julian Reschke
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Mark Nottingham

Monday, 2 September 2013

• Expect: + Upgrade: = ... Daniel Stenberg
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Ilari Liusvaara
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 Roberto Peon
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 James M Snell
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 Julian Reschke
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Julian Reschke
• Re: Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Willy Tarreau
• Proposal for #486: Requiring proxies to process warn-date Mark Nottingham

Sunday, 1 September 2013

• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 陈智昌
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 陈智昌
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Adrien de Croy
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Ilari Liusvaara
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Martin Thomson
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Martin Thomson
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 James M Snell
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Amos Jeffries
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Amos Jeffries
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 陈智昌
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Martin Thomson
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Ilya Grigorik
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 陈智昌
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Ryan Hamilton
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 陈智昌
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Mike Belshe
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 James M Snell
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Ryan Hamilton

Saturday, 31 August 2013

• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 James M Snell
• Fwd: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt) Mark Nottingham
• Re: CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 陈智昌

Friday, 30 August 2013

• Re: [#197] the extra stuff in GOAWAY Roberto Peon
• [#197] the extra stuff in GOAWAY Martin Thomson
• CONNECT and HTTP/2.0 Martin Thomson
• Re: Jesse's feedback on HTTP/2 header compression Martin Thomson
• Re: The List (of application-layer desired features) Nico Williams
• Fwd: [rtcweb] Purpose of PNTAW list Martin Thomson
• Re: Jesse's feedback on HTTP/2 header compression Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Welzl
• Usage of HTTP Proxies in NAT/FW traversal for RTCWeb Magnus Westerlund

Thursday, 29 August 2013

• Header compression editor's draft moved Martin Thomson
• HTTPbis WG Interim Meeting, October 9-11, 2013 IESG Secretary
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Ryan Hamilton
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Tuexen
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Mike Belshe
• Jesse's feedback on HTTP/2 header compression Jesse Wilson
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Welzl
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Welzl
• Re: Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE Roberto Peon
• Re: Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa

Wednesday, 28 August 2013

• Re: Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE Roberto Peon
• Re: Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE Martin Thomson
• Re: Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE Roberto Peon
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Mike Belshe
• RE: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Thornburgh
• RE: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Thornburgh
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Tuexen
• Indexing new entry with a size greater than SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• #490, was: Ranges Julian Reschke
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) 陈智昌
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Tuexen
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) 陈智昌
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Welzl
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) 陈智昌
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Welzl
• New mailing list: http-devops Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 27 August 2013

• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Ryan Hamilton
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Ryan Hamilton
• Re: New HPACK draft out (-03) Roberto Peon
• Re: New HPACK draft out (-03) Martin Thomson
• New HPACK draft out (-03) Roberto Peon
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-03.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Roberto Peon
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Mike Belshe
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Ted Hardie
• RE: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Thornburgh
• More header compression comments Martin Thomson
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Tim Bray
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Mike Belshe
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Stephen Farrell
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Martin Thomson
• Re: HPACK substitution & header table pruning Martin Thomson
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater 陈智昌
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features) Michael Tuexen
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater 陈智昌
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater 陈智昌
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Eliot Lear
• Re: HPACK substitution & header table pruning Roberto Peon

Monday, 26 August 2013

• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Roy T. Fielding
• Re: HPACK substitution & header table pruning Ilari Liusvaara
• Re: Encryption Design Team [was: What "mandatory to offer" means] Patrick McManus
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Patrick McManus
• Re: HPACK substitution & header table pruning James M Snell
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Leif Hedstrom
• HPACK substitution & header table pruning Jesse Wilson
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater 陈智昌
• Re: What "mandatory to offer" means 陈智昌
• Encryption Design Team [was: What "mandatory to offer" means] Mark Nottingham
• Re: What "mandatory to offer" means Eliot Lear
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Willy Tarreau
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Roberto Peon
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Salvatore Loreto
• Re: What "mandatory to offer" means Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Willy Tarreau
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Michael Sweet
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Michael Sweet
• Planning our next Interim Meeting Mark Nottingham

Sunday, 25 August 2013

• What "mandatory to offer" means Mark Nottingham
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Roberto Peon
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Roberto Peon
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Roberto Peon
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Salvatore Loreto
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Salvatore Loreto
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Roberto Peon
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Salvatore Loreto
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Mike Belshe
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Roberto Peon
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Eliot Lear
• Re: RLE for header compression opcodes James M Snell
• RLE for header compression opcodes Martin Thomson
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater 陈智昌
• RE: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Markus Lanthaler
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Yoav Nir
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Eliot Lear
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Yoav Nir
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Willy Tarreau
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Roberto Peon
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Salvatore Loreto
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater 陈智昌
• Mandatory encryption *is* theater Eliot Lear
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition Roy T. Fielding

Saturday, 24 August 2013

• RE: Restricting the HTTP method definition Larry Masinter
• Re: Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works Roberto Peon
• Re: Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works Roberto Peon
• Re: Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa

Friday, 23 August 2013

• Re: Type codecs within hpack James M Snell
• Re: Type codecs within hpack Robert Collins
• Re: Type codecs within hpack James M Snell
• Re: Type codecs within hpack Martin Thomson
• Re: Type codecs within hpack James M Snell
• Re: Type codecs within hpack Martin Thomson
• Re: Type codecs within hpack James M Snell
• Re: Type codecs within hpack Martin Thomson
• RE: Type codecs within hpack James M Snell
• RE: Type codecs within hpack Mike Bishop
• Re: Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works Roberto Peon
• RE: [tcpm] Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Scharf, Michael (Michael)
• Understanding how HPAC draft-02 works Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Type codecs within hpack James M Snell
• Re: WGLC: p4 MUSTs Roy T. Fielding
• Draft Minutes from Hamburg Mark Nottingham
• Berlin Minutes Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 22 August 2013

• Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-snell-link-method-03.txt James M Snell
• Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-02.txt Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: HTTP/2.0 issue: magic method registration Alexey Melnikov
• HTTP/2.0 issue: magic method registration Amos Jeffries

Wednesday, 21 August 2013

• Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-02.txt Roberto Peon
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-02.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-06.txt Martin Thomson
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-06.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• Re: END_PUSH_PROMISE Martin Thomson
• Re: END_PUSH_PROMISE David Morris
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition Roy T. Fielding
• END_PUSH_PROMISE Martin Thomson
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition James M Snell
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition Zhong Yu
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition Amos Jeffries
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition James M Snell
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition Roy T. Fielding
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition Roberto Peon
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition Roberto Peon
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition James M Snell
• Re: Restricting the HTTP method definition Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 20 August 2013

• Restricting the HTTP method definition James M Snell
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams Martin Thomson
• Re: PUSH_PROMISE at invalid times Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams Gábor Molnár
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams Gábor Molnár

Monday, 19 August 2013

• Re: Nice James M Snell
• Re: Nice Martin Thomson
• Re: PUSH_PROMISE at invalid times Martin Thomson
• Re: Nice Mark Nottingham

Sunday, 18 August 2013

• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method Nicolas Mailhot

Saturday, 17 August 2013

• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? James M Snell
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Martin J. Dürst
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Martin J. Dürst
• PUSH_PROMISE at invalid times Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa

Friday, 16 August 2013

• Re: Nice James M Snell
• Re: Nice Martin Thomson
• Re: Nice James M Snell
• Re: Nice Martin Thomson
• Re: Nice Martin Thomson
• Re: Nice Martin Thomson
• Re: Nice 陈智昌
• Re: Nice James M Snell
• Re: Nice 陈智昌
• Nice Martin Thomson
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Roberto Peon
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? James M Snell
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 Roberto Peon
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Roberto Peon
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Martin Thomson
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Roberto Peon
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Martin J. Dürst
• Re: http methods Julian Reschke
• Re: http methods Julian Reschke
• Re: http methods Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: http methods Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 Julian Reschke
• Re: http methods Julian Reschke
• Re: http methods Julian Reschke

Thursday, 15 August 2013

• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 Roberto Peon
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 Martin Thomson
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 Jeff Pinner
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 Martin Thomson
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 Roberto Peon
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 Martin Thomson
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 Roberto Peon
• Re: incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 Martin Thomson
• incrementally indexed headers should be inserted in index '0' instead of len(table)+1 Roberto Peon
• Re: Header Compression... James M Snell
• Re: Header Compression... Michael Sweet

Wednesday, 14 August 2013

• Re: HTTP/2.0 wireshark dissector Jeff Pinner
• Re: HTTP/2.0 wireshark dissector 陈智昌
• Re: HTTP/2.0 wireshark dissector Ludin, Stephen
• Re: HTTP/2.0 wireshark dissector 陈智昌
• Re: HTTP/2.0 wireshark dissector Roberto Peon
• HTTP/2.0 wireshark dissector Ludin, Stephen
• Re: Header Compression... James M Snell
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams James M Snell
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams 陈智昌
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams Martin Thomson
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method Martin Thomson
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size Martin Thomson
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Martin J. Dürst
• Re: [#202] reason phrase Patrick McManus
• Re: [#202] reason phrase Benjamin Carlyle
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• RE: CONTINUATION Frame Size Manger, James H
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Willy Tarreau
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? James M Snell
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Roberto Peon
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams James M Snell
• Re: initial stream id from a client Shigeki Ohtsu

Tuesday, 13 August 2013

• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Fred Akalin
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams Martin Thomson
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? James M Snell
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams James M Snell
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Fred Akalin
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? James M Snell
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Martin Thomson
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method James M Snell
• Dealing with Invalid UTF-8 James M Snell
• Re: UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? Michael Sweet
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method 陈智昌
• UTF-8 or ASCII Header Names? James M Snell
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method Roberto Peon
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method James M Snell
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method 陈智昌
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method Ilari Liusvaara
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method 陈智昌
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams Alexey Melnikov
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method 陈智昌
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method Martin Thomson
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method Martin Thomson
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method James M Snell
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method Ilari Liusvaara
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method Martin Thomson
• Re: initial stream id from a client Roberto Peon
• Re: Implicit close of idle streams Martin Thomson
• Re: initial stream id from a client Martin Thomson
• Re: http methods Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: http methods Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method Ilari Liusvaara
• Implicit close of idle streams James M Snell
• Re: initial stream id from a client Roberto Peon
• Re: initial stream id from a client Michael Sweet
• Re: initial stream id from a client Jeff Pinner
• Re: initial stream id from a client Martin Thomson
• Re: initial stream id from a client Michael Sweet
• Re: initial stream id from a client Jeff Pinner
• Re: initial stream id from a client Jeff Pinner
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method 陈智昌
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method Martin Thomson
• Re: initial stream id from a client Martin Thomson
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size Martin Thomson
• Re: http methods Roberto Peon
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method Roberto Peon
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push Roberto Peon
• Re: :scheme and CONNECT method 陈智昌
• :scheme and CONNECT method Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push 陈智昌
• Re: http methods Julian Reschke
• Re: http methods Julian Reschke
• Re: http methods Julian Reschke
• Re: initial stream id from a client Alexey Melnikov
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push Mike Belshe
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push Julian Reschke
• Re: http methods James M Snell
• Re: http methods Poul-Henning Kamp
• http methods 陈智昌
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push 陈智昌
• RE: initial stream id from a client Mike Bishop
• Re: initial stream id from a client Shigeki Ohtsu
• RE: initial stream id from a client Mike Bishop
• initial stream id from a client Shigeki Ohtsu
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push Mike Belshe
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push James M Snell
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push Mike Belshe
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size James M Snell
• RE: CONTINUATION Frame Size Manger, James H
• Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-05.txt Martin Thomson
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size Patrick McManus
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream Martin Thomson
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size James M Snell
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-05.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size Roberto Peon
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream Roberto Peon

Monday, 12 August 2013

• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream Martin Thomson
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size James M Snell
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream Jeff Pinner
• Re: CONTINUATION Frame Size Martin Thomson
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream Martin Thomson
• CONTINUATION Frame Size James M Snell
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream James M Snell
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream Jeff Pinner
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream Jeff Pinner
• Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream James M Snell
• [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream Martin Thomson
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push James M Snell
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push James M Snell
• Re: [#193] Request payloads and push Roberto Peon
• [#193] Request payloads and push Martin Thomson
• Re: Applicability of new status code "4xx Credentials expired"? Martin Thomson
• Re: DNS behaviour should be specified (the principled & forward-thinking case for SRV) Eliot Lear
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions Julian Reschke
• Re: Applicability of new status code "4xx Credentials expired"? Ross Nicoll

Sunday, 11 August 2013

• Re: Applicability of new status code "4xx Credentials expired"? Tim Bray
• Re: Applicability of new status code "4xx Credentials expired"? mike amundsen
• Applicability of new status code "4xx Credentials expired"? Jan Algermissen
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') Willy Tarreau
• Re: WGLC: p4, 304 Not Modified Roy T. Fielding

Saturday, 10 August 2013

• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') Michael Sweet
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') Michael Sweet
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') Willy Tarreau
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') Willy Tarreau
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') Willy Tarreau
• Re: #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') Poul-Henning Kamp
• #468 p2: Expectation extensions (was: Expect header 'understand' vs 'meet') Roy T. Fielding
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Willy Tarreau
• DNS behaviour should be specified (the principled & forward-thinking case for SRV) Josh Goodall

Friday, 9 August 2013

• Re: [tcpm] Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Yuchung Cheng
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Yuchung Cheng
• Re: [tcpm] TCP checksum issues? Yuchung Cheng
• Re: Connection-level flow control and DATA frame against closed state streams Martin Thomson

Thursday, 8 August 2013

• Re: Who implemented which version of the compression draft? Amos Jeffries
• Re: Connection-level flow control and DATA frame against closed state streams Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa

Wednesday, 7 August 2013

• RE: Who implemented which version of the compression draft? Brian Raymor (MS OPEN TECH)
• Re: Connection-level flow control and DATA frame against closed state streams 陈智昌
• Re: Who implemented which version of the compression draft? Fred Akalin
• Re: Who implemented which version of the compression draft? Jain, Shakesh
• Re: Who implemented which version of the compression draft? Fred Akalin
• Who implemented which version of the compression draft? Fred Akalin
• Re: Connection-level flow control and DATA frame against closed state streams Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Connection-level flow control and DATA frame against closed state streams Martin Thomson
• Re: PUSH Clarifications Julian Reschke
• Connection-level flow control and DATA frame against closed state streams Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa

Tuesday, 6 August 2013

• Re: PUSH Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: [#202] reason phrase Julian Reschke
• Re: PUSH Clarifications Julian Reschke
• Re: PUSH Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: PUSH Clarifications Julian Reschke
• Re: Header Compression... James M Snell
• Header Compression... James M Snell
• Re: PUSH Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: [#202] reason phrase David Morris
• Re: CONTINUATION frame and continuation flag James M Snell
• Re: [#202] reason phrase James M Snell
• Re: [#202] reason phrase Julian Reschke
• Re: CONTINUATION frame and continuation flag Martin Thomson
• Re: PUSH Clarifications Martin Thomson
• Re: Continuation Frames in draft -04 Martin Thomson
• [#202] reason phrase Martin Thomson
• Re: CONTINUATION frame and continuation flag David Morris
• CONTINUATION frame and continuation flag Alexey Melnikov
• Issues addressed in the -23 drafts Mark Nottingham
• Re: The List (of application-layer desired features) 陈智昌
• Re: The List (of application-layer desired features) Mike Belshe
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-method-registrations-12.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• Re: The List (of application-layer desired features) Mike Belshe
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-authscheme-registrations-07.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• FYI: ALPN in OpenSSL Mark Nottingham
• RE: The List (of application-layer desired features) Yoav Nir
• Re: The List (of application-layer desired features) Roberto Peon
• RE: The List (of application-layer desired features) Scharf, Michael (Michael)
• Re: The List (of application-layer desired features) Roberto Peon
• The List (of application-layer desired features) Roberto Peon
• Re: Public node-http2 server Fred Akalin
• Re: PUSH Clarifications Julian Reschke

Monday, 5 August 2013

• RE: PUSH Clarifications Mike Bishop
• Public node-http2 server Gábor Molnár
• Re: PUSH Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: PUSH Clarifications Julian Reschke
• Re: PUSH Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: PUSH Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: PUSH Clarifications Robert Collins
• Re: PUSH Clarifications Julian Reschke
• Re: Question regarding perfect forward secrecy in http 2.0 Carsten Krüger
• Re: PUSH Clarifications James M Snell
• PUSH Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: Continuation Frames in draft -04 James M Snell
• Continuation Frames in draft -04 Jeff Pinner
• RE: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Scharf, Michael (Michael)
• Re: HTTP 2 Header Tables and Priority Martin Thomson

Sunday, 4 August 2013

• http/2 hello world Patrick McManus
• Re: HTTP 2 Header Tables and Priority Steve Davis
• Re: HTTP 2 Header Tables and Priority Fred Akalin
• Re: HTTP 2 Header Tables and Priority Roberto Peon
• HTTP 2 Header Tables and Priority Steve Davis
• Re: WGLC: p2 MUSTs Amos Jeffries
• Re: WGLC: p2 MUSTs Roy T. Fielding
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Adrien de Croy

Saturday, 3 August 2013

• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Willy Tarreau
• implementation adding HTTP version negotiation in the clear to NodeJS Indutny Spdy module emile.stephan@orange.com
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Peter Lepeska
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? 陈智昌
• [#186] Negotiation strings Martin Thomson
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Willy Tarreau
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Amos Jeffries

Friday, 2 August 2013

• Re: Question regarding perfect forward secrecy in http 2.0 Amos Jeffries
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Peter Lepeska
• Re: Question regarding perfect forward secrecy in http 2.0 David Morris
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Nico Williams
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Poul-Henning Kamp
• Question regarding perfect forward secrecy in http 2.0 Carsten Krüger
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Willy Tarreau
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? 陈智昌
• Re: [tcpm] httpbis chromium data Pasi Sarolahti
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Willy Tarreau
• Re: Feedback on TCP Fast Open? 陈智昌
• Feedback on TCP Fast Open? Scharf, Michael (Michael)

Thursday, 1 August 2013

• Agenda Revision for Friday Mark Nottingham
• Re: WGLC: p1 MUSTs Roy T. Fielding
• Re: MUST use normative language (Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback) Amos Jeffries
• RE: Header Compression: Reference set choice RUELLAN Herve
• Re: MUST use normative language (Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback) Eliot Lear
• Re: MUST use normative language (Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback) Yoav Nir
• Re: MUST use normative language (Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback) Julian Reschke
• Re: WGLC: p1 MUSTs Roy T. Fielding

Wednesday, 31 July 2013

• Re: WGLC: p1 MUSTs Alex Rousskov
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS Peter Lepeska
• Re: MUST use normative language (Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback) cowwoc
• Re: WGLC: p1 MUSTs Roy T. Fielding
• MUST use normative language (Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback) Eliot Lear
• Re: "MAY employ flow control", was: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback Fred Akalin
• "MAY employ flow control", was: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback Julian Reschke
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" cowwoc
• Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback Amos Jeffries
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Eliot Lear
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Michael Sweet
• draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 feedback Julian Reschke
• RE: Header Compression: Reference set choice RUELLAN Herve
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Mark Nottingham
• Re: feedback for draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-01 Mark Nottingham
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Eliot Lear
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Yoav Nir
• feedback for draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-01 Julian Reschke
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Willy Tarreau
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Dave Crocker
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Julian Reschke
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Dave Crocker
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" cowwoc
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Martin Thomson
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Dave Crocker
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS Martin Thomson
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Julian Reschke
• Re: Header Compression: Reference set choice James M Snell

Tuesday, 30 July 2013

• RE: Header Compression: Reference set choice Mike Bishop
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Willy Tarreau
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" cowwoc
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" cowwoc
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Willy Tarreau
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Julian Reschke
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" cowwoc
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Julian Reschke
• RE: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Mike Bishop
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Julian Reschke
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Julian Reschke
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" cowwoc
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" cowwoc
• Re: HTTP/2-04 Katana (C#) open source server prototype Patrick McManus
• Re: HTTP/2-04 Katana (C#) open source server prototype Patrick McManus
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" Julian Reschke
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS Peter Lepeska
• NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to" cowwoc
• Header Compression: Reference set choice RUELLAN Herve
• HTTP/2-04 Katana (C#) open source server prototype Brian Raymor (MS OPEN TECH)
• RE: Tracking implementations emile.stephan@orange.com
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Gábor Molnár
• Re: Berlin and Hamburg Agendas Mark Nottingham
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS Amos Jeffries

Monday, 29 July 2013

• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS 陈智昌
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS Fred Akalin
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS Peter Lepeska
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS 陈智昌
• Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS 陈智昌
• Re: question on non header block data of chained HEADERS and PP James M Snell
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* Amos Jeffries
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Leif Hedstrom
• Re: Tracking implementations Mark Nottingham
• HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS emile.stephan@orange.com
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* Julian Reschke
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* Mark Nottingham
• Tracking implementations Mark Nottingham
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* Julian Reschke
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* Julian Reschke
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* Mark Nottingham
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* Julian Reschke
• Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* Mark Nottingham

Sunday, 28 July 2013

• HTTP-draft-04/2.0 implementation in C Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• fyi: websec inviting more feedback on session continuation (i.e. cookies) during our meeting on Monday at 15:10 Tobias Gondrom
• httpbis -23 drafts Julian Reschke
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Michael Sweet
• #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-* Julian Reschke
• Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses Willy Tarreau
• #483, was: WGLC p1: MUST fix Content-Length? Julian Reschke
• Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses Julian Reschke
• Re: #486, was: p2: Expectation extensions Julian Reschke
• Re: #303: Generic semantics for the 400 status code (also #302) Mark Nottingham
• #303: Generic semantics for the 400 status code (also #302) Julian Reschke
• Re: HTTP header compression benchmark Christian Grothoff
• Re: Header compression integrity Martin Thomson
• Re: question on non header block data of chained HEADERS and PP Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTP header compression benchmark Mark Nottingham
• Re: draft-fielding-http-key-02 obvious shortcoming & failure Mark Nottingham
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Eliot Lear
• Header compression integrity Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa

Friday, 26 July 2013

• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Zhong Yu
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Yoav Nir
• question on non header block data of chained HEADERS and PP Patrick McManus
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Zhong Yu

Thursday, 25 July 2013

• draft-fielding-http-key-02 obvious shortcoming & failure Henrik Nordström
• Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-23, "6.3.6 205 Reset Content" Julian Reschke
• Re: Berlin and Hamburg Agendas Martin Thomson
• Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-23, "6.3.6 205 Reset Content" Roy T. Fielding
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Julian Reschke
• #491, was: draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-23, "6.3.6 205 Reset Content" Julian Reschke
• RE: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Markus Lanthaler
• RE: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Markus Lanthaler
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Julian Reschke
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Willy Tarreau
• RE: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Markus Lanthaler
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Julian Reschke
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Julian Reschke
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Nicolas Mailhot
• draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-23, "6.3.6 205 Reset Content" Julian Reschke
• Re: Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Julian Reschke
• Additional status codes in HTTP/1.1 Willy Tarreau
• Re: END_FLOW_CONTROL for particular stream interpretation Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa

Wednesday, 24 July 2013

• Re: END_FLOW_CONTROL for particular stream interpretation Kulkarni, Saurabh
• Re: END_FLOW_CONTROL for particular stream interpretation Patrick McManus
• END_FLOW_CONTROL for particular stream interpretation Kulkarni, Saurabh
• Re: 6.9.2 Initial Flow Control Window Size Example Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Amos Jeffries
• Re: SETTINGS_MAX_BUFFER_SIZE in SETTINGS Frame? Martin Thomson
• SETTINGS_MAX_BUFFER_SIZE in SETTINGS Frame? Kulkarni, Saurabh
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Roberto Peon

Tuesday, 23 July 2013

• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Martin Thomson
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Roberto Peon
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Martin Thomson
• Re: 6.9.2 Initial Flow Control Window Size Example Martin Thomson
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Roberto Peon
• Re: 6.5.2 FLOW_CONTROL_OPTIONS text Martin Thomson
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Martin Thomson
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Ryan Hamilton
• 6.9.2 Initial Flow Control Window Size Example Patrick McManus
• 6.5.2 FLOW_CONTROL_OPTIONS text Patrick McManus
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Ilari Liusvaara
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? 陈智昌
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Zhong Yu
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Zhong Yu
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Yoav Nir
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? 陈智昌
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Roberto Peon
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Martin Thomson
• Implementation drafts for Hamburg Martin Thomson
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE James M Snell
• Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Martin Thomson
• MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE Gábor Molnár
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? David Morris
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Amos Jeffries

Monday, 22 July 2013

• Re: Berlin and Hamburg Agendas Mark Nottingham
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Yoav Nir
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Ilari Liusvaara
• Re: Berlin and Hamburg Agendas Yuchung Cheng
• Re: Berlin and Hamburg Agendas Yuchung Cheng
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Zhong Yu
• Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Mike Belshe
• implementation regrets... James M Snell
• Berlin and Hamburg Agendas Mark Nottingham
• HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension? Zhong Yu
• Re: HTTP header compression benchmark Michael Sweet

Saturday, 20 July 2013

• Re: Flow control clarification Roberto Peon
• Re: Flow control clarification 陈智昌
• Flow control clarification Ludin, Stephen
• HTTP header compression benchmark Christian Grothoff

Friday, 19 July 2013

• Re: Default Stream Priority? Martin Thomson
• Re: Default Stream Priority? David Morris
• Re: Default Stream Priority? Martin Thomson
• Default Stream Priority? Kulkarni, Saurabh
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nico Williams
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nico Williams
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
• Efficiency and statefulness in conflict (Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns) Nico Williams
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nico Williams
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions Shigeki Ohtsu

Thursday, 18 July 2013

• Re: Questions about stream state transitions Martin Thomson
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions Martin Thomson
• Re: Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions Shigeki Ohtsu
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions Ilari Liusvaara
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions Shigeki Ohtsu
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Nico Williams
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Amos Jeffries
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nico Williams

Wednesday, 17 July 2013

• Re: Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set Roberto Peon
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Nico Williams
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Nico Williams
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Nico Williams
• Re: Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set Jeff Pinner
• RE: Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set Mike Bishop
• Re: Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set Martin Thomson
• Re: Questions about stream state transitions Martin Thomson
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Reto Bachmann-Gmür
• Header compression question: duplicate header entry and current index on computing working set Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Questions about stream state transitions Shigeki Ohtsu
• Re: SETTINGS error handling Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Albert Lunde
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Yoav Nir
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Amos Jeffries
• Re: Authentication over HTTP David Morris
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Amos Jeffries

Tuesday, 16 July 2013

• Re: Authentication over HTTP Nico Williams
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Nico Williams
• Re: SETTINGS error handling Roberto Peon
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Reto Bachmann-Gmür
• Re: SETTINGS error handling Roberto Peon
• Re: SETTINGS error handling Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Amos Jeffries
• Re: HTTP/2 : problem with section 3.5 Connection setup magic Amos Jeffries
• Re: SETTINGS error handling Amos Jeffries
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Amos Jeffries
• Re: HTTPS, proxy environment variables and non-CONNECT access Robert Collins
• Re: HTTPS, proxy environment variables and non-CONNECT access Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Josh Howlett
• Re: HTTPS, proxy environment variables and non-CONNECT access Robert Collins
• Re: HTTPS, proxy environment variables and non-CONNECT access Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Henry Story
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Nico Williams
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Nico Williams
• HTTPS, proxy environment variables and non-CONNECT access Robert Collins

Monday, 15 July 2013

• Re: Authentication over HTTP Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Authentication over HTTP J Ross Nicoll
• Re: SETTINGS error handling Martin Thomson
• SETTINGS error handling Patrick McManus
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Nico Williams
• Re: HTTP/2 : problem with section 3.5 Connection setup magic Martin Thomson
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Henry Story
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Reto Bachmann-Gmür
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Ludin, Stephen
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Nicolas Mailhot
• HTTP/2 : problem with section 3.5 Connection setup magic Amos Jeffries
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-23.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-23.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-23.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-23.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-23.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-23.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Yoav Nir
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Henry Story
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Yoav Nir
• Re: Authentication over HTTP Poul-Henning Kamp

Sunday, 14 July 2013

• Re: Authentication over HTTP J Ross Nicoll
• Authentication over HTTP M Stefan
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Martin Nilsson
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Mark Nottingham
• MPEG-DASH over HTTP/2.0 SPDY Christopher Mueller
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Nicolas Mailhot
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Sam Pullara
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Roberto Peon

Saturday, 13 July 2013

• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 J Ross Nicoll
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Stephen Farrell
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Yoav Nir
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Yoav Nir
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Mike Belshe
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Mark Delany
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Sam Pullara
• Re: PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Stephen Farrell
• PRISM and HTTP/2.0 Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp

Friday, 12 July 2013

• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Yoav Nir
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Amos Jeffries
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Amos Jeffries
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns James M Snell
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Ludin, Stephen
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Jeff Pinner
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Patrick McManus
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Christian Parpart
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Michael Sweet
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Gábor Molnár
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Gábor Molnár
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Mike Belshe
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Amos Jeffries
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Mark Nottingham
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp

Thursday, 11 July 2013

• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Sam Pullara
• Re: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-03.txt Tim Bray
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns James M Snell
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns James M Snell
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Patrick McManus
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Sam Pullara
• Re: Header Compression - streaming proposal Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Sam Pullara
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. Martin Thomson
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. James M Snell
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns James M Snell
• RE: Alternative Header Compression Update.. RUELLAN Herve
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Martin Thomson
• RE: Header Compression - streaming proposal RUELLAN Herve
• RE: Compression update RUELLAN Herve
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Michael Sweet
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Amos Jeffries
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Christian Parpart
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Amos Jeffries
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. Amos Jeffries
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
• Re: Compression update Amos Jeffries
• Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Amos Jeffries
• Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-03.txt Tim Bray

Wednesday, 10 July 2013

• HTTP router point-of-view concerns Christian Parpart
• Compression update Martin Thomson
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. James M Snell
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. Michael Sweet
• RE: Alternative Header Compression Update.. Mike Bishop
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Martin Thomson
• Re: Header Compression - streaming proposal Martin Thomson
• Re: Fwd: IPR Disclosure: Microsoft Corporation's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 cowwoc
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. James M Snell
• Re: Fwd: IPR Disclosure: Microsoft Corporation's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Mike Belshe
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Julian Reschke
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Jeff Pinner
• Re: Alternative Header Compression Update.. Michael Sweet
• Re: [#168] After TLS is finished Alexey Melnikov
• Re: #481, was: WGLC: p7 MUSTs Julian Reschke
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Julian Reschke
• Re: Fwd: IPR Disclosure: Microsoft Corporation's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Header Compression - streaming proposal Gábor Molnár
• Fwd: IPR Disclosure: Microsoft Corporation's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Mark Nottingham
• Alternative Header Compression Update.. James M Snell

Tuesday, 9 July 2013

• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Jeff Pinner
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Michael Sweet
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Michael Sweet
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Jeff Pinner
• Re: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Martin Thomson
• Re: WINDOW_UPDATE Clarification Martin Thomson
• Re: WINDOW_UPDATE Clarification Gábor Molnár
• WINDOW_UPDATE Clarification James M Snell
• [#168] After TLS is finished Martin Thomson
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-01.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04 Michael Sweet
• Issue #171: ACK Frame Proposal (Low Priority) James M Snell
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback Michael Sweet
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback Michael Sweet
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback James M Snell
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback Michael Sweet
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback Martin Thomson
• RE: Header Compression Implementation Feedback Mike Bishop
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback Michael Sweet
• RE: Header Compression Implementation Feedback Mike Bishop
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback Michael Sweet
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback Amos Jeffries
• Re: Header Compression Implementation Feedback James M Snell

Monday, 8 July 2013

• Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04.txt Martin Thomson
• I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04.txt internet-drafts@ietf.org
• Typed Header Codecs Update James M Snell
• Header Compression Implementation Feedback James M Snell
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. Mike Belshe
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. Jeff Pinner
• Re: Header Compression - streaming proposal Gábor Molnár
• Re: Web Keys and HTTP Signatures Nico Williams
• Re: Web Keys and HTTP Signatures Nico Williams

Saturday, 6 July 2013

• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate, mk2 陈智昌
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate, mk2 Gábor Molnár

Friday, 5 July 2013

• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. Martin Thomson
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. Mike Belshe
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. Michael Sweet
• Re: Header Compression - streaming proposal Martin Thomson
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. Mike Belshe
• Re: Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. Amos Jeffries
• Misc Comments on Layering layering work and sections 1-5. Mike Belshe
• Re: Header Compression - streaming proposal Gábor Molnár
• RE: Header Compression Clarifications RUELLAN Herve
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes Amos Jeffries
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Gábor Molnár
• Header Compression - streaming proposal Gábor Molnár
• Re: Incorporating Layering TF work [was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate, mk2] Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 4 July 2013

• Re: One comment on draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-00 Michael Sweet
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Gábor Molnár
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Roberto Peon
• RE: Incorporating Layering TF work [was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate, mk2] RUELLAN Herve
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes cowwoc
• RE: One comment on draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-00 RUELLAN Herve
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Amos Jeffries
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes Amos Jeffries
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes cowwoc
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Michael Sweet
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Michael Sweet
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes Julian Reschke
• One comment on draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-00 Michael Sweet
• RE: Header Compression Clarifications RUELLAN Herve
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes cowwoc
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes Julian Reschke
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes cowwoc
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Michael Sweet
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes cowwoc
• RE: Header Compression Overview RUELLAN Herve
• RE: Header Compression Clarifications RUELLAN Herve
• RE: Header Compression Clarifications RUELLAN Herve
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes Julian Reschke
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes Mark Nottingham
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes cowwoc
• Incorporating Layering TF work [was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate, mk2] Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 3 July 2013

• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes Martin Thomson
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes cowwoc
• Header compression implementation Gábor Molnár
• Re: Please don't re-write TLS (Was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate) Yoav Nir
• Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes Martin Thomson
• NEW ISSUE: Clarify whether request must be processed before responding with redirection codes cowwoc
• HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate, mk2 Martin Thomson
• Re: Issue # 164: HTTP Method Case Roberto Peon
• Re: Issue # 164: HTTP Method Case James M Snell
• Re: Issue # 164: HTTP Method Case Roberto Peon
• Re: Issue # 164: HTTP Method Case Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Martin Thomson
• Issue # 164: HTTP Method Case James M Snell
• Re: Please don't re-write TLS (Was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate) Ludin, Stephen
• Re: Please don't re-write TLS (Was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate) Albert Lunde
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? Michael Sweet
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? James M Snell
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? Roberto Peon
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? Ben Niven-Jenkins
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? Roberto Peon
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? Ben Niven-Jenkins
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? James M Snell
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? Mark Nottingham
• Re: Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? Roberto Peon
• Using PUSH to refresh a previously requested resource? Ben Niven-Jenkins
• Please don't re-write TLS (Was: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate) Yoav Nir
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Jeff Pinner
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate James M Snell
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Jeff Pinner
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate 陈智昌
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Ludin, Stephen
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate 陈智昌
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Ludin, Stephen

Tuesday, 2 July 2013

• Re: Header Compression Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers 陈智昌
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Roberto Peon
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Roberto Peon
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Roberto Peon
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Roberto Peon
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate David Morris
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: Header Compression Clarifications Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Amos Jeffries
• Header Compression Clarifications James M Snell
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Amos Jeffries
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate 陈智昌
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Roberto Peon
• RE: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Mike Bishop
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers James M Snell
• RE: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Mike Bishop
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Mike Belshe
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Sam Pullara
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Ludin, Stephen
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate David Morris
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate 陈智昌
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate James M Snell
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Sam Pullara
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate David Morris
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate David Morris
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate David Morris
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Martin Thomson
• Re: Header Compression Overview James M Snell
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate 陈智昌
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Roberto Peon
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Roberto Peon
• Re: Header Compression Overview Ilari Liusvaara
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate James M Snell
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Sam Pullara
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate 陈智昌
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Sam Pullara
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate James M Snell
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Albert Lunde
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate 陈智昌
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Sam Pullara
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate James M Snell
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Martin Thomson
• RE: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Mike Bishop
• RE: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Mike Bishop
• RE: Header Compression Overview RUELLAN Herve
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Albert Lunde
• RE: Header compression question RUELLAN Herve
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Michael Sweet
• Re: Header compression question Gábor Molnár
• RE: Header compression question RUELLAN Herve
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Stephen Farrell
• Re: Header Compression Overview James M Snell
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Martin Thomson
• Re: Header Compression Overview Roberto Peon
• RE: Header Compression Overview James M Snell
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Sam Pullara
• Re: Header compression question Mark Nottingham
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Martin Thomson
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Shigeki Ohtsu
• RE: Header Compression Overview Mike Bishop
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Patrick McManus
• Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Jeff Pinner
• Re: Header Compression Overview James M Snell
• HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate Martin Thomson
• Re: [#156] Pushing HEAD James M Snell
• Re: [#156] Pushing HEAD Martin Thomson
• Re: [#156] Pushing HEAD James M Snell
• Re: [#156] Pushing HEAD Roberto Peon

Monday, 1 July 2013

• [#156] Pushing HEAD Martin Thomson
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Martin Thomson
• Re: Rough Minutes from SF F2F Mark Nottingham
• Re: #487 Resubmission of 403 Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values James M Snell
• Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values Martin Thomson
• Re: Header Compression Overview James M Snell
• Re: Header Compression Overview James M Snell
• RE: Header Compression Overview Mike Bishop
• Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values James M Snell
• Re: Header Compression Overview Gábor Molnár
• Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values Martin Thomson
• Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values James M Snell
• Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values Martin Thomson
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Sam Pullara
• Issue #155: Capping header compression index values James M Snell
• Re: Header Compression Overview James M Snell
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Martin Thomson
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers James M Snell
• Re: #487 Resubmission of 403 Julian Reschke
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Martin Thomson
• RE: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Mike Bishop
• Header Compression Overview James M Snell
• Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the request is complete Roberto Peon
• Re: Late change to implementation draft? Roberto Peon
• Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the request is complete Martin Thomson
• Late change to implementation draft? Martin Thomson
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Martin Thomson
• Re: #487 Resubmission of 403 Roy T. Fielding
• Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the request is complete Jeff Pinner
• Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the request is complete James M Snell
• Re: HTTP Mapping editorial changes James M Snell
• Re: Ranges Adrien W. de Croy
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Amos Jeffries
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers David Morris
• Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Michael Sweet

Last message date: Monday, 30 September 2013 14:14:05 UTC