Re: Accept-Transfer header field (was HTTP/1.1 Issues:

Jeffrey Mogul (mogul@pa.dec.com)
Wed, 19 Nov 97 15:22:59 PST

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Koen Holtman: "Re: Accept-Transfer header field (was HTTP/1.1 Issues:"
Previous message: rlgray@raleigh.ibm.com: "Re: HTTP/1.1 ISSUE: TRAILER_FIELDS - Proposed Resolution"
In reply to: Koen Holtman: "Re: Accept-Transfer header field (was HTTP/1.1 Issues:"
Next in thread: Scott Lawrence: "Re: Accept-Transfer header field (was HTTP/1.1 Issues:"

Koen writes:

    Let me clarify my position: I think it would be OK to add an
    extensibility mechanism of the usual ;name=value type, but we should
    not define lots of complicated name=value pairs right now.
    
Then we are in perfect agreement.

-Jeff

Next message: Koen Holtman: "Re: Accept-Transfer header field (was HTTP/1.1 Issues:"
Previous message: rlgray@raleigh.ibm.com: "Re: HTTP/1.1 ISSUE: TRAILER_FIELDS - Proposed Resolution"
In reply to: Koen Holtman: "Re: Accept-Transfer header field (was HTTP/1.1 Issues:"
Next in thread: Scott Lawrence: "Re: Accept-Transfer header field (was HTTP/1.1 Issues:"