Weekly github digest (HTTP Working Group Specifications)
Required Domain proposal for Additional Certificates
Fwd: [Ietf-message-headers] Requesting provisional registration for AMP-Cache-Transform header
Formalizing the HTTP State Tokens proposal.
Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189)
Interoping draft 20 HTTP/3
[Errata Rejected] RFC7234 (5564)
I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-variants-05.txt
Weekly github digest (HTTP Working Group Specifications)
Fwd: IETF 104 Remote Participation Information
:protocol (was: draft-kinnear-httpbis-http2-transport questions)
[Errata Held for Document Update] RFC7231 (5541)
draft-kinnear-httpbis-http2-transport questions
- Re: draft-kinnear-httpbis-http2-transport questions
- Re: draft-kinnear-httpbis-http2-transport questions
- Re: draft-kinnear-httpbis-http2-transport questions
- Re: draft-kinnear-httpbis-http2-transport questions
Weekly github digest (HTTP Working Group Specifications)
Fwd: draft-richsalz-httpbis-https-downgrade-00.txt
- Re: Fwd: draft-richsalz-httpbis-https-downgrade-00.txt
- Re: draft-richsalz-httpbis-https-downgrade-00.txt
I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-client-hints-07.txt
The Refresh header is still with us
- Re: The Refresh header is still with us
- Re: The Refresh header is still with us
Weekly github digest (HTTP Working Group Specifications)
I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-semantics-04.txt
I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-messaging-04.txt
I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-cache-04.txt
DRAFT agenda for IETF 104
I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-rand-access-live-04.txt
Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-thomson-http-hx-uri-00.txt
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-thomson-http-hx-uri-00.txt
When using HTTP over SCTP, what do I put in CGI's REMOTE_ADDR?
Weekly github digest (HTTP Working Group Specifications)
Re: Making sure the RFC is good for Qwilt [WAS Re: Call for Adoption: Cache HTTP Response Header]
Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Requesting provisional registration for AMP-Cache-Transform header
Weekly github digest (HTTP Working Group Specifications)
Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-proxy-status-00.txt
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-proxy-status-00.txt
- Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-proxy-status-00.txt
[WIP/Idea] A protocol for securing CDN-related communications
- Re: [WIP/Idea] A protocol for securing CDN-related communications
Weekly github digest (HTTP Working Group Specifications)
HTTP/2 re-sync connection level flow control?
Signed HTTP Exchanges use case
Moving 2817 to Historic
Data motivating CH? (From PING)
Weekly github digest (HTTP Working Group Specifications)
Are HTTP/2 state changes atomic with respect to SETTINGS_MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS?
- Re: Are HTTP/2 state changes atomic with respect to SETTINGS_MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS?
- RE: Are HTTP/2 state changes atomic with respect to SETTINGS_MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS?
- Re: Are HTTP/2 state changes atomic with respect to SETTINGS_MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS?
- Re: Are HTTP/2 state changes atomic with respect to SETTINGS_MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS?
- RE: Are HTTP/2 state changes atomic with respect to SETTINGS_MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS?
- Re: Are HTTP/2 state changes atomic with respect to SETTINGS_MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS?
[Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7230 (5623)
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7230 (5623)
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7230 (5623)
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7230 (5623)
I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-02.txt
Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with COMMENT)
Weekly github digest (HTTP Working Group Specifications)
[Technical Errata Reported] RFC7233 (5620)
HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- RE: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- RE: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
- Re: HTTP/3 Prioritization Proposal
I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-cache-header-00.txt
Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
- Re: Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Weekly github digest (HTTP Working Group Specifications)
Shouldn't we add a new CLOSING state in H2 ?
- Re: Shouldn't we add a new CLOSING state in H2 ?
Conflicting MUST in RFC7540
Weekly github digest (HTTP Working Group Specifications)
Cache Digests status
Call for Adoption: Cache HTTP Response Header
- Re: Call for Adoption: Cache HTTP Response Header
- Re: Call for Adoption: Cache HTTP Response Header
- Re: Call for Adoption: Cache HTTP Response Header
- Re: Call for Adoption: Cache HTTP Response Header
[Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (5599)
Weekly github digest (HTTP Working Group Specifications)
Re: SH: Integer limits
RE: Security Model, Secondary Certs, and ORIGIN
Re: Migrating some high-entropy HTTP headers to Client Hints.
- Re: Migrating some high-entropy HTTP headers to Client Hints.
- Re: Migrating some high-entropy HTTP headers to Client Hints.
Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- BCP56bis: advice for using status codes in applications
- Re: BCP56bis: advice for using status codes in applications
- Re: BCP56bis: advice for using status codes in applications
- Re: BCP56bis: advice for using status codes in applications
- Re: BCP56bis: advice for using status codes in applications
- Re: BCP56bis: advice for using status codes in applications
- Re: BCP56bis: advice for using status codes in applications
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: BCP56bis: advice for using status codes in applications
- Re: BCP56bis: advice for using status codes in applications
- Re: BCP56bis: advice for using status codes in applications
- Re: BCP56bis: advice for using status codes in applications
- Re: BCP56bis: advice for using status codes in applications
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis-08