Re: Last Call: Upgrading to TLS Within HTTP/1.1 to Proposed Standard

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Jeffrey Schiller: "RE: Last Call: Upgrading to TLS Within HTTP/1.1 to Proposed Standard"
• Previous message: Scott Lawrence: "RE: Last Call: Upgrading to TLS Within HTTP/1.1 to Proposed Standard"

Scott Lawrence wrote:

> [5] is noted because it defines an HTTP status code - we could remove it
> from this document and let them add an entry to the registry we are
> creating.

I looked at draft-ietf-tls-http-upgrade-02, and spotted one glitch: you
mention that WebDAV defines status codes 420-424, but you didn't mention
207.  Not a big deal, maybe, but worth adding if you're updating the doc
anyway.

--
/==============================================================\
|John Stracke    | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.|
|Chief Scientist |=============================================|
|eCal Corp.      |"I lost an 7-foot boa constrictor once in our|
|francis@ecal.com|house." --Gary Larson on his youth           |
\==============================================================/

• Next message: Jeffrey Schiller: "RE: Last Call: Upgrading to TLS Within HTTP/1.1 to Proposed Standard"
• Previous message: Scott Lawrence: "RE: Last Call: Upgrading to TLS Within HTTP/1.1 to Proposed Standard"