ietf
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: ART Area Review for draft-ietf-calext-caldav-attachments-02

2017-06-26 07:59:48
from [Julian Reschke] [Permanent Link] 
On 2017-05-14 16:23, Julian Reschke wrote:

...
Another thing that I just noticed: the spec uses Content-Disposition as request header field (<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-calext-caldav-attachments-02#section-3.4>), however it's currently only defined as response header field (RFC6266). 

Best regards, Julian
[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: ART Area Review for draft-ietf-calext-caldav-attachments-02, Julian Reschke <=
Previous by Date:  Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-03.txt> (Unique IPv6 Prefix Per Host) to Best Current Practice, Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
Next by Date:  Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-03.txt> (Unique IPv6 Prefix Per Host) to Best Current Practice, Lorenzo Colitti
Previous by Thread:  Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-03.txt> (Unique IPv6 Prefix Per Host) to Best Current Practice, Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
Next by Thread:  Which is the right "RFC2119" Boilerplate?, Stewart Bryant
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]