Network Working Group R. Fielding Request for Comments: 2616 ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Implementation and Analysis", RFC 1305, March 1992.[29] Deutsch, P., "DEFLATE Compressed Data Format Specificationversion 1.3", RFC 1951, May 1996.[30] S. Spero, "Analysis of HTTP Performance Problems,"http://sunsite.unc.edu/mdma-release/http-prob.html.[31] Deutsch, P. and J. Gailly, "ZLIB Compressed Data FormatSpecification version 3.3", RFC 1950, May 1996.[32] Franks, J., Hallam-Baker, P., Hostetler, J., Leach, P.,Luotonen, A., Sink, E. and L. Stewart, "An Extension to HTTP:Digest Access Authentication", RFC 2069, January 1997.[33] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H. and T.Berners-Lee, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC2068, January 1997.[34] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate RequirementLevels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.[35] Troost, R. and Dorner, S., "Communicating PresentationInformation in Internet Messages: The Content-DispositionHeader", RFC 1806, June 1995.[36] Mogul, J., Fielding, R., Gettys, J. and H. Frystyk, "Use andInterpretation of HTTP Version Numbers", RFC 2145, May 1997.[jg639][37] Palme, J., "Common Internet Message Headers", RFC 2076, February1997. [jg640]Fielding, et al. Standards Track [Page 160]RFC 2616 HTTP/1.1 June 1999[38] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of Unicode andISO-10646", RFC 2279, January 1998. [jg641][39] Nielsen, H.F., Gettys, J., Baird-Smith, A., Prud'hommeaux, E.,Lie, H., and C. Lilley. "Network Performance Effects ofHTTP/1.1, CSS1, and PNG," Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM '97, CannesFrance, September 1997.[jg642][40] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail
Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046, November1996. [jg643][41] Alvestrand, H., "IETF Policy on Character Sets and Languages",BCP 18, RFC 2277, January 1998. [jg644][42] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R. and L. Masinter, "Uniform ResourceIdentifiers (URI): Generic Syntax and Semantics", RFC 2396,August 1998. [jg645][43] Franks, J., Hallam-Baker, P., Hostetler, J., Lawrence, S.,Leach, P., Luotonen, A., Sink, E. and L. Stewart, "HTTPAuthentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication", RFC2617, June 1999. [jg646][44] Luotonen, A., "Tunneling TCP based protocols through Web proxyservers," Work in Progress. [jg647][45] Palme, J. and A. Hopmann, "MIME E-mail Encapsulation ofAggregate Documents, such as HTML (MHTML)", RFC 2110, March1997.[46] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP9, RFC 2026, October 1996.[47] Masinter, L., "Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol(HTCPCP/1.0)", RFC 2324, 1 April 1998.[48] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet MailExtensions (MIME) Part Five: Conformance Criteria and Examples",RFC 2049, November 1996.[49] Troost, R., Dorner, S. and K. Moore, "Communicating PresentationInformation in Internet Messages: The Content-Disposition HeaderField", RFC 2183, August 1997.Fielding, et al. Standards Track [Page 161]RFC 2616 HTTP/1.1 June 199918 Authors' AddressesRoy T. FieldingInformation and Computer Science
Page 2:
eferred to as "HTTP/1.1", and is an
Page 5 and 6:
12.1 Server-driven Negotiation ....
Page 7 and 8:
14.40 Trailer .....................
Page 9 and 10:
1.2 RequirementsThe key words "MUST
Page 12 and 13:
Fielding, et al. Standards Track [P
Page 14 and 15:
equest chain ----------------------
Page 16 and 17:
Elements separated by a bar ("|") a
Page 18 and 19:
HTTP/1.1 header field values can be
Page 20 and 21:
An application that sends a request
Page 22 and 23:
3.2.3 URI ComparisonWhen comparing
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
is not desirable and is discouraged
Page 28 and 29:
CRLFchunk = chunk-size [ chunk-exte
Page 30 and 31:
When in canonical form, media subty
Page 32 and 33:
3.9 Quality ValuesHTTP content nego
Page 34 and 35:
RFC 2616 HTTP/1.1 June 1999HTTP/1.1
Page 36 and 37:
message-body = entity-body| Transfe
Page 38 and 39:
in advance.Messages MUST NOT includ
Page 40 and 41:
equested resource, and 501 (Not Imp
Page 42 and 43:
names) MUST use the following rules
Page 44 and 45:
values for the first digit:- 1xx: I
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
how the transfer-length of a messag
Page 50 and 51:
connection-token close.If either th
Page 52 and 53:
idempotent (see section 9.1.2). Non
Page 54 and 55:
compatibility with RFC 2068, a serv
Page 56 and 57:
If at any point an error status is
Page 58 and 59:
optional features implemented by th
Page 60 and 61:
- Extending a database through an a
Page 62 and 63:
intervention (or other means) on th
Page 64 and 65:
10.1.2 101 Switching ProtocolsThe s
Page 66 and 67:
esponse MAY include new or updated
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
The response MUST include the follo
Page 72 and 73:
If the client is sending data, a se
Page 74 and 75:
If the response could be unacceptab
Page 76 and 77:
10.4.15 414 Request-URI Too LongThe
Page 78 and 79:
10.5.5 504 Gateway TimeoutThe serve
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Caching would be useless if it did
Page 84 and 85:
Warning (but without removing any e
Page 86 and 87:
If the user has overridden the basi
Page 88 and 89:
in the past. This means that the re
Page 90 and 91:
RFC 2616 HTTP/1.1 June 1999the time
Page 92 and 93:
simple:response_is_fresh = (freshne
Page 94 and 95:
match.In HTTP/1.1, a conditional re
Page 96 and 97:
validators or strong validators. Cl
Page 98 and 99:
- MAY send a weak entity tag instea
Page 100 and 101:
Unless specifically constrained by
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
warn-code 1xx, which are deleted ev
Page 106 and 107:
for the associated entity, its enti
Page 108 and 109:
- DELETE- POSTIn order to prevent d
Page 110 and 111:
The Accept request-header field can
Page 112 and 113:
image/jpeg = 0.5text/html;level=2 =
Page 114 and 115:
Note: If the request does not inclu
Page 116 and 117:
Accept-Ranges: bytesbut are not req
Page 118 and 119:
containing an Authorization field,
Page 120 and 121:
- Restrictions on what may be store
Page 122 and 123:
improve privacy in some cases, we c
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127: must-revalidateBecause a cache MAY
Page 128 and 129: understand.For example, consider a
Page 130 and 131: new coding is known to be acceptabl
Page 132 and 133: 14.14 Content-LocationThe Content-L
Page 134 and 135: Note: while the definition of Conte
Page 136 and 137: server SHOULD return them in the or
Page 138 and 139: Some origin server implementations
Page 140 and 141: Expires = "Expires" ":" HTTP-dateAn
Page 142 and 143: A client MUST include a Host header
Page 144 and 145: een modified since the date given b
Page 146 and 147: RFC 2616 HTTP/1.1 June 1999If none
Page 148 and 149: 14.29 Last-ModifiedThe Last-Modifie
Page 150 and 151: MAY require that behavior be consis
Page 152 and 153: yte-ranges-specifier = bytes-unit "
Page 154 and 155: Content) instead of 200 (OK).- The
Page 156 and 157: The TE request-header field indicat
Page 158 and 159: Fielding, et al. Standards Track [P
Page 160 and 161: a cache cannot determine from the r
Page 162 and 163: SHOULD NOT, by default, forward the
Page 164 and 165: this user agent behavior in mind.Re
Page 166 and 167: designers and implementors be parti
Page 168 and 169: strongly correlated to the membersh
Page 170 and 171: serious security considerations. Co
Page 172 and 173: The HTTP protocol has evolved consi
Page 174 and 175: Protocol -- HTTP/1.0", RFC 1945, Ma
Page 178 and 179: University of California, IrvineIrv
Page 180 and 181: Fielding, et al. Standards Track [P
Page 182 and 183: Notes:1) Additional CRLFs may prece
Page 184 and 185: full compliance with the MIME proto
Page 186 and 187: ead chunk-size and CRLF}read entity
Page 188 and 189: - understand any valid response in
Page 190 and 191: CREATE had a race that required an
Page 192 and 193: also needed to be a general header,
Page 194: Fielding, et al. Standards Track [P
show all

Network Working Group R. Fielding Request for Comments: 2616 ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?