Re: Transitioning from RFC2616ff to RFC7230ff
Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> Sat, 07 February 2015 13:20 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ietf.org@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 385491A036C for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Feb 2015 05:20:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8PC5ENMs4T7c for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Feb 2015 05:20:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C4FA1A0273 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 7 Feb 2015 05:20:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1YK5G3-00068q-2C for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 13:17:11 +0000
Resent-Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2015 13:17:11 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1YK5G3-00068q-2C@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <derhoermi@gmx.net>) id 1YK5Fx-00067z-6x for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 13:17:05 +0000
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <derhoermi@gmx.net>) id 1YK5Fs-0006Nn-Kh for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 13:17:05 +0000
Received: from netb ([89.204.153.200]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LcEPJ-1Xt2Pw4B6b-00jYJB; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 14:16:30 +0100
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
To: Andreas Maier <MAIERA@de.ibm.com>
Cc: IETF HTTP WG <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2015 14:16:32 +0100
Message-ID: <fv3cdadorpoto45qtpkrknq6o3mg7aadu5@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
References: <OF3F14AB83.0645B818-ONC1257DE1.0045BCFD-C1257DE1.0046ED68@de.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <OF3F14AB83.0645B818-ONC1257DE1.0045BCFD-C1257DE1.0046ED68@de.ibm.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:xBsd5nmw0jPDke9iszhlG/C4NKxMFcxUjqZOQh3scHHg03wJdUR g60oWKkry7jSj7o7QXdb4MmykPKwwh7LSNHfUQlGgA+fFJ0fHBx5ti9+yqcpSkSEGxyU2Kb 10ad5lm7CDus4FtacfB/vQ6pNtw9aLmwLXZ5XfuSCaGrsor0iN/pduulT/96I3EZOafgpd1 9+EqaLxcpZa6NVT61XJ8g==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.17.21; envelope-from=derhoermi@gmx.net; helo=mout.gmx.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.592, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1YK5Fs-0006Nn-Kh bdecdd2221d8c62b3003e1c6388271c4
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Transitioning from RFC2616ff to RFC7230ff
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/fv3cdadorpoto45qtpkrknq6o3mg7aadu5@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/28777
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
* Andreas Maier wrote: >I am involved with a number of standards that use HTTP 1.1. We currently >reference RFC2616 and related RFCs, and would like to upgrade to RFC7230 >and related RFCs. Catching up with the archives I just came across this which might be useful for people in a similar situation: http://www.w3.org/mid/E9701F76-F4DB-4BC2-B1F5-6F3FA07E85C4@gbiv.com -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de D-10243 Berlin · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de Available for hire in Berlin (early 2015) · http://www.websitedev.de/
- Re: Transitioning from RFC2616ff to RFC7230ff Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Transitioning from RFC2616ff to RFC7230ff Andreas Maier
- Re: Transitioning from RFC2616ff to RFC7230ff Julian Reschke