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

Thursday, 30 June 2011

Re: status code for header fields to big Dzonatas Sol
Re: status code for header fields to big Roy T. Fielding
Re: status code for header fields to big Willy Tarreau
status code for header fields to big Julian Reschke
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Julian Reschke
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Amos Jeffries
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Julian Reschke
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Julian Reschke
Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation Willy Tarreau
Re: #231: Considerations for new headers Willy Tarreau
Re: #231: Considerations for new headers Willy Tarreau
Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation Adrien de Croy
Re: #231: Considerations for new headers Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: Whitespace before responses Daniel Stenberg
Re: #231: Considerations for new headers Mark Nottingham
Re: #231: Considerations for new headers Julian Reschke
Re: #231: Considerations for new headers Mark Nottingham
Re: #231: Considerations for new headers Julian Reschke
Re: #231: Considerations for new headers Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #231: Considerations for new headers Julian Reschke
Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation Julian Reschke
Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation Willy Tarreau
Re: Whitespace before responses Willy Tarreau
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Amos Jeffries
Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation Mark Nottingham
Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation Adrien de Croy
Re: Whitespace before responses Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 29 June 2011

Re: Whitespace before responses Willy Tarreau
Whitespace before responses Mark Nottingham
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Karl Dubost
Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Karl Dubost
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Karl Dubost
Re: #231: Considerations for new headers Amos Jeffries
Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation Julian Reschke
#231: Considerations for new headers Mark Nottingham
Re: #283: Set expectations around buffering Julian Reschke
Fwd: IESG Statement on Designating RFCs as Historic [#254] Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 28 June 2011

Re: #283: Set expectations around buffering Mark Nottingham
Re: #283: Set expectations around buffering Julian Reschke
Re: Redirects and headers Mark Nottingham
Redirects and headers Anne van Kesteren
Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Mark Nottingham
Re: #295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) Mark Nottingham
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Mark Nottingham
Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation Mark Nottingham
Re: #283: Set expectations around buffering Mark Nottingham
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham

Monday, 27 June 2011

Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Julian Reschke
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Dzonatas Sol

Sunday, 26 June 2011

Re: #297: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Brian Pane
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Brian Pane
Re: #297: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Poul-Henning Kamp
#282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham
#297: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Mark Nottingham
Fwd: HTTPBIS - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 81 Mark Nottingham

Saturday, 25 June 2011

Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Julian Reschke
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Julian Reschke
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Willy Tarreau
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Julian Reschke
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Willy Tarreau
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Amos Jeffries
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
RE: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Thomas Maslen
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Brian Pane
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham

Friday, 24 June 2011

Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Willy Tarreau
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Julian Reschke
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements David Morris
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Brian Pane
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Brian Pane
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Julian Reschke
Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Mark Nottingham
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Willy Tarreau
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 23 June 2011

Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Mark Nottingham
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Andreas Petersson
Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Yves Lafon
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Yves Lafon
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Julian Reschke
Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Amos Jeffries
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Amos Jeffries
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Mark Nottingham
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Mark Baker

Wednesday, 22 June 2011

Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Mark Nottingham
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Mark Nottingham
Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Adrien de Croy
Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Mark Nottingham
Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Brian Pane
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Amos Jeffries
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham
Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Roy T. Fielding
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Mark Nottingham
Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Adrien de Croy
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Karl Dubost
Re: Possible erratum in Part 1, section 9.4. Adrian Custer
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Yves Lafon
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Julian Reschke
RE: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Fred Bohle
Re: Possible erratum in Part 1, section 9.4. Julian Reschke
Re: Possible erratum in Part 1, section 9.4. Bjoern Hoehrmann
Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Julian Reschke
Possible erratum in Part 1, section 9.4. Adrian Custer
Re: API Rate Limits and HTTP Code [#255] Julian Reschke
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham
Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation Mark Nottingham
Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Mark Nottingham
Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation Adrien de Croy
Re: #285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Adrien de Croy
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Brian Pane
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Julian Reschke
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
#288: Considering messages in isolation Mark Nottingham
#283: Set expectations around buffering Mark Nottingham
Re: #186: Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy Mark Nottingham
Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT Mark Nottingham
#282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Mark Nottingham
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Mark Nottingham
#285: Strength of requirements on Accept re: 406 Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 21 June 2011

Re: Content-Disposition status Julian Reschke
Fwd: Second Last Call: <draft-hammer-hostmeta-16.txt> (Web Host Metadata) to Proposed Standard Peter Saint-Andre

Monday, 20 June 2011

Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header Willy Tarreau
Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header Adrien de Croy
Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header Willy Tarreau
Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header Willy Tarreau
Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header Willy Tarreau
Re: Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header Poul-Henning Kamp

Tuesday, 14 June 2011

Denial of Service using invalid Content-Length header Jan Starke

Saturday, 18 June 2011

Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Julian Reschke

Friday, 17 June 2011

Last Call for HTML5 in the W3C Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 14 June 2011

[Fwd: I-D Action: draft-melnikov-mime-default-charset-00.txt] Alexey Melnikov

Friday, 10 June 2011

Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Dzonatas Sol
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Dzonatas Sol
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 9 June 2011

Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Dzonatas Sol
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Dzonatas Sol
Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Tim
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Adrien de Croy
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Adrien de Croy
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Poul-Henning Kamp
RE: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Paul E. Jones
RE: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Paul E. Jones

Wednesday, 8 June 2011

Re: [apps-discuss] [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Nico Williams
Re: [apps-discuss] [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Breno de Medeiros
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Mark Nottingham
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Roy T. Fielding
Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Dzonatas Sol
Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Willy Tarreau
Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Tim
RE: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Nico Williams
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Julian Reschke
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Julian Reschke
RE: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Paul E. Jones
Re: [apps-discuss] [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Mark Nottingham
Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Nico Williams
Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Nico Williams
Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Randy Fischer
Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Nico Williams

Tuesday, 7 June 2011

Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Tim
Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Nico Williams
Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Ben Adida
Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Nico Williams
Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Nico Williams
Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Nico Williams
RE: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Paul E. Jones
Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Adam Barth
Re: [OAUTH-WG] [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Nico Williams
Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Nico Williams
Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Adam Barth
Re: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Nico Williams
Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Dzonatas Sol
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Mark Nottingham
Re: #296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Julian Reschke
Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Mark Nottingham
Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Willy Tarreau
Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Mark Nottingham
Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Willy Tarreau
RE: [http-state] [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Paul E. Jones

Monday, 6 June 2011

Re: RFC 6266 on Use of the Content-Disposition Header Field in the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Mark Nottingham
Fwd: RFC 6266 on Use of the Content-Disposition Header Field in the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Julian Reschke
Quebec City Mark Nottingham

Sunday, 5 June 2011

Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Dzonatas Sol
Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Mark Nottingham

Saturday, 4 June 2011

Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Dzonatas Sol
Re: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Willy Tarreau

Friday, 3 June 2011

p1 7.2.4: retrying requests Mark Nottingham
New version of Memento I-D Herbert van de Sompel
If-Range and cache validation using Last-Modified Matthew Cox
Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Stephen Farrell

Thursday, 2 June 2011

Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Mark Nottingham
Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Dave CROCKER
Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Brian Pane
RE: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Eran Hammer-Lahav
Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Adam Barth
Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 1 June 2011

RE: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Eran Hammer-Lahav
Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Stephen Farrell
Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Brian Pane
Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Dzonatas Sol

Tuesday, 31 May 2011

Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Mark Nottingham
Re: 9.9 CONNECT (Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate?) Adrien de Croy
Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: 9.9 CONNECT (Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate?) Dzonatas Sol
Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
9.9 CONNECT (Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate?) Dzonatas Sol
#296: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Mark Nottingham
Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Julian Reschke
Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Mark Nottingham
Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Mark Nottingham

Monday, 30 May 2011

Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Dzonatas Sol
Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Roy T. Fielding
Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Mark Nottingham
Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Mark Nottingham

Sunday, 29 May 2011

Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Mark Nottingham
Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Roy T. Fielding
Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Dzonatas Sol

Saturday, 28 May 2011

Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Dzonatas Sol
Re: 203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Dzonatas Sol
Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Brian Pane
203 Non-Authoritative Information: deprecate? Mark Nottingham
Re: #295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) Adam Barth
Re: Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Yngve N. Pettersen (Developer Opera Software ASA)
Re: #295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) Mark Nottingham
RE: #295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) Eric Lawrence
Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-00.txt Mark Nottingham

Friday, 27 May 2011

Content-Disposition status Julian Reschke
Re: Ticket #294, was: 403 description clarifications Julian Reschke
Re: #186: Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy Mark Nottingham
Re: #291: Cache Extensions can override no-store, etc. Mark Nottingham
Re: #289: "understanding" methods Mark Nottingham
Re: #117: cache invalidation upon update Mark Nottingham
Re: [#38] httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers Mark Nottingham
Re: #295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) Adam Barth
#295: Applying original fragment to "plain" redirected URI (also #43) Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 25 May 2011

Re: Ticket #294, was: 403 description clarifications Julian Reschke
Ticket #294, was: 403 description clarifications Julian Reschke

Tuesday, 24 May 2011

Re: #186: Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy Julian Reschke

Monday, 23 May 2011

Re: [TLS] Revised TLS Charter Brian Smith

Tuesday, 24 May 2011

Re: #186: Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy Mark Nottingham

Monday, 23 May 2011

Re: #186: Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy Julian Reschke

Friday, 20 May 2011

RE: [apps-discuss] HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Eran Hammer-Lahav
#291: Cache Extensions can override no-store, etc. Mark Nottingham
Re: #292: Pragma Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 19 May 2011

Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP Yves Lafon
Re: Location, fragments, and when not to use them Julian Reschke
Re: Location, fragments, and when not to use them Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 18 May 2011

Location, fragments, and when not to use them Julian Reschke

Tuesday, 17 May 2011

Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-http-browser-hints-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-http-browser-hints-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-http-browser-hints-00.txt Mark Nottingham

Monday, 16 May 2011

Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP Dzonatas Sol

Friday, 13 May 2011

Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF Dzonatas Sol
Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF Dzonatas Sol
Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF Arun Ranganathan
Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP Dzonatas Sol
Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF Arun Ranganathan
Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF Bjoern Hoehrmann
Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF Mark Nottingham

Thursday, 12 May 2011

Re: Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF Dzonatas Sol
Discussion of Blob URI Scheme for Binary Data Access | IETF Arun Ranganathan
Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP Dzonatas Sol
Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP Dzonatas Sol
Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: Media Fragments spec and HTTP Adrien de Croy
Media Fragments spec and HTTP Mark Nottingham
#292: Pragma Mark Nottingham
Re: BCP for returning HTTP Authentication (2617) Error Status (questions from the OAuth WG) Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 11 May 2011

Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Willy Tarreau
Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Jamie Lokier
Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Willy Tarreau
Re: BCP for returning HTTP Authentication (2617) Error Status (questions from the OAuth WG) Julian Reschke
Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Ben Niven-Jenkins
Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Willy Tarreau
Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Mark Nottingham
Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Willy Tarreau
Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Mark Nottingham
Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Willy Tarreau

Tuesday, 10 May 2011

Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Adrien de Croy
Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Willy Tarreau
Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Brian Pane
Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Willy Tarreau
Re: On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Poul-Henning Kamp
On the abuse of chunking for interactive usages Willy Tarreau

Monday, 9 May 2011

HTTP MAC Authentication Scheme Eran Hammer-Lahav
BCP for returning HTTP Authentication (2617) Error Status (questions from the OAuth WG) Eran Hammer-Lahav
I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-httpbis-authscheme-registrations-01.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org

Saturday, 7 May 2011

Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Dzonatas Sol

Friday, 6 May 2011

Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Dzonatas Sol
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] William A. Rowe Jr.
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Dzonatas Sol

Thursday, 5 May 2011

Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Roy T. Fielding
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Mark Nottingham
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Mark Nottingham
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Adrien de Croy
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Mark Nottingham
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Roy T. Fielding
Re: About draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-01.txt Brian Pane
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Mark Nottingham
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Roy T. Fielding
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 4 May 2011

Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Roy T. Fielding
Re: Clarifying Pragma's introduction Roy T. Fielding
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Willy Tarreau
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Mark Nottingham
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Mark Nottingham
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Mark Nottingham
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Poul-Henning Kamp
Clarifying Pragma's introduction Mark Nottingham
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Mark Nottingham
Re: #290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Poul-Henning Kamp
#290 [was: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching] Mark Nottingham
#289: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Mark Nottingham
Re: httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers Mark Nottingham

Tuesday, 3 May 2011

Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Mark Nottingham
Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Ben Niven-Jenkins
Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Adrien de Croy
Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Dzonatas Sol
RE: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Thomson, Martin
Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Poul-Henning Kamp
RE: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Thomson, Martin
Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Willy Tarreau
RE: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Thomson, Martin
Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries David Morris
Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Julian Reschke
Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Willy Tarreau
Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Mark Nottingham
RE: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Thomson, Martin
Re: Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Mark Nottingham
Privacy and HTTP intermediaries Thomson, Martin

Monday, 2 May 2011

[Fwd: Document Action: 'Moving DIGEST-MD5 to Historic' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-kitten-digest-to-historic-04.txt)] Alexey Melnikov
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Julian Reschke
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Julian Reschke
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Daniel Stenberg
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: #282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Willy Tarreau
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Willy Tarreau
Re: HTTP Draft-p1 and http scheme definition Mykyta Yevstifeyev
Re: HTTP Draft-p1 and http scheme definition Mark Nottingham
Re: HTTP Draft-p1 and http scheme definition Mykyta Yevstifeyev
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Mark Nottingham
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Mark Nottingham
#186: Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy Mark Nottingham
Re: HTTP Draft-p1 and http scheme definition Mark Nottingham
#282: Recommend minimum sizes for protocol elements Mark Nottingham
Re: NEW: #235: Cache Invalidation only happens upon successful responses Mark Nottingham
#117: cache invalidation upon update Mark Nottingham

Sunday, 1 May 2011

HTTP Draft-p1 and http scheme definition Mykyta Yevstifeyev

Friday, 29 April 2011

DNT Header RFC Karl Dubost

Thursday, 28 April 2011

New version of the Memento Internet Draft Herbert van de Sompel
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: p6 -14 version and ticket #274 Mykyta Yevstifeyev
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Andreas Petersson
Re: p6 -14 version and ticket #274 Julian Reschke
p6 -14 version and ticket #274 Mykyta Yevstifeyev
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Andreas Petersson
Heuristics and "negative caching" Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 27 April 2011

RE: httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers Moore, Jonathan (CIM)
[#38] httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers Mark Nottingham
Re: httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers Mark Nottingham
Issues addressed in the -14 drafts Mark Nottingham
Re: p6-cache-13; max-age typo, editorial inconsistency Mark Nottingham
Re: About draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-01.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: About draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-01.txt Brian Pane

Tuesday, 26 April 2011

httpbis-p6-cache-14, and vary headers Poul-Henning Kamp
RE: IPv6 and draft-petersson-forwarded-for Dan Wing
Re: IPv6 and draft-petersson-forwarded-for Andreas Petersson
Re: About draft-nottingham-http-pipeline-01.txt Mark Nottingham
IPv6 and draft-petersson-forwarded-for Dan Wing

Tuesday, 19 April 2011

Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Andreas Petersson
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau

Monday, 18 April 2011

Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Mark Nottingham
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-14.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-14.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-14.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-14.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-14.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-14.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-14.txt Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
httpbis -14 drafts Julian Reschke
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Andreas Petersson

Sunday, 17 April 2011

Re: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc5987bis-00.txt Julian Reschke
Re: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc5987bis-00.txt Martin J. Dürst

Saturday, 16 April 2011

Fwd: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc5987bis-00.txt Julian Reschke
Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies Mike Belshe

Friday, 15 April 2011

Re: I-D Action:draft-reschke-rfc5987bis-00.txt Bjoern Hoehrmann
Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies Willy Tarreau

Thursday, 14 April 2011

Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies Adrien de Croy
Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies 陈智昌
Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies Adrien de Croy
Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies Willy Tarreau
Re: Talking HTTPS to proxies 陈智昌
Talking HTTPS to proxies Willy Tarreau
p6-cache-13; max-age typo, editorial inconsistency Mark Baker

Saturday, 9 April 2011

Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Willy Tarreau
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching David Morris
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Willy Tarreau
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Mark Nottingham

Friday, 8 April 2011

Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Brian Pane
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching David Morris
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Andreas Petersson
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Andreas Petersson
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Julian Reschke
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Julian Reschke
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Julian Reschke
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Mark Nottingham
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Julian Reschke
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Martin J. Dürst
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: Issue 178 (Content-MD5), was: Prague Minutes Julian Reschke
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Mark Nottingham
RE: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Thomson, Martin
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Martin J. Dürst

Thursday, 7 April 2011

RE: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Thomson, Martin
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Matt Domsch
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Karl Dubost
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Karl Dubost
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Willy Tarreau
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Andreas Petersson
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Julian Reschke
RE: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Moore, Jonathan (CIM)
Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Poul-Henning Kamp
Re: SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Poul-Henning Kamp
I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-00.txt Andreas Petersson
SHOULD-level requirements in p6-caching Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 6 April 2011

Realm requirements (issue 177) Eran Hammer-Lahav
Issue 178 (Content-MD5), was: Prague Minutes Julian Reschke
Fwd: RFC 6202 on Known Issues and Best Practices for the Use of Long Polling and Streaming in Bidirectional HTTP Julian Reschke

Tuesday, 5 April 2011

Re: API Rate Limits and HTTP Code [#255] Mark Nottingham
Re: API Rate Limits and HTTP Code [#255] Adrien de Croy
Re: API Rate Limits and HTTP Code [#255] Karl Dubost
Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code mike amundsen
Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code Cameron Heavon-Jones
Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code mike amundsen
Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code Cameron Heavon-Jones
Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code mike amundsen

Monday, 4 April 2011

Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code Julian Reschke
Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code Cameron Heavon-Jones
Re: #20: Default charsets for text media types Martin J. Dürst
Prague Minutes Mark Nottingham
#20: Default charsets for text media types Mark Nottingham
Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code mike amundsen

Friday, 1 April 2011

Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code mike amundsen
Re: ABNF for Authorization header not quite right Julian Reschke
Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code mike amundsen
Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code Julian Reschke
Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code mike amundsen
ABNF for Authorization header not quite right Manger, James H

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