Status 100

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Hallam-Baker: "Re: confidentiality and the referer field"
• Previous message: Matthew Rubenstein: "Re: confidentiality and the referer field"
• Next in thread: John Franks: "Re: Status 100"
• Reply: John Franks: "Re: Status 100"
• Reply: David W. Morris: "Re: Status 100"

I fell behind on my mail for a while there, and there does not seem to
have been much discussion on this topic for the last 2 weeks, but I did
not get the impression that consensus had been achieved, nor did I see
a last-call for this.  Did I miss something?  If not, given that there
is only 2 hours scheduled for http in Munich, I think we should finish
this up now.

I think making 100 requestable by the client is the most attractive
solution (for me as a server implementer anyway).

Richard L. Gray
chocolate - the One True food group

• Next message: Hallam-Baker: "Re: confidentiality and the referer field"
• Previous message: Matthew Rubenstein: "Re: confidentiality and the referer field"
• Next in thread: John Franks: "Re: Status 100"
• Reply: John Franks: "Re: Status 100"
• Reply: David W. Morris: "Re: Status 100"