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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

If the response could be unacceptable, a user agent SHOULDtemporarily stop receipt of more data and query the user for adecision on further actions.10.4.8 407 Proxy Authentication RequiredThis code is similar to 401 (Unauthorized), but indicates that theclient must first authenticate itself with the proxy. The proxy MUSTreturn a Proxy-Authenticate header field (section 14.33) containing achallenge applicable to the proxy for the requested resource. Theclient MAY repeat the request with a suitable Proxy-Authorizationheader field (section 14.34). HTTP access authentication is explainedin "HTTP Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication"[43].10.4.9 408 Request TimeoutThe client did not produce a request within the time that the serverwas prepared to wait. The client MAY repeat the request withoutmodifications at any later time.10.4.10 409 ConflictThe request could not be completed due to a conflict with the currentstate of the resource. This code is only allowed in situations whereit is expected that the user might be able to resolve the conflictand resubmit the request. The response body SHOULD include enoughFielding, et al. Standards Track [Page 67]RFC 2616 HTTP/1.1 June 1999information for the user to recognize the source of the conflict.Ideally, the response entity would include enough information for theuser or user agent to fix the problem; however, that might not bepossible and is not required.Conflicts are most likely to occur in response to a PUT request. Forexample, if versioning were being used and the entity being PUTincluded changes to a resource which conflict with those made by anearlier (third-party) request, the server might use the 409 responseto indicate that it can't complete the request. In this case, theresponse entity would likely contain a list of the differencesbetween the two versions in a format defined by the responseContent-Type.10.4.11 410 Gone
The requested resource is no longer available at the server and noforwarding address is known. This condition is expected to beconsidered permanent. Clients with link editing capabilities SHOULDdelete references to the Request-URI after user approval. If theserver does not know, or has no facility to determine, whether or notthe condition is permanent, the status code 404 (Not Found) SHOULD beused instead. This response is cacheable unless indicated otherwise.The 410 response is primarily intended to assist the task of webmaintenance by notifying the recipient that the resource isintentionally unavailable and that the server owners desire thatremote links to that resource be removed. Such an event is common forlimited-time, promotional services and for resources belonging toindividuals no longer working at the server's site. It is notnecessary to mark all permanently unavailable resources as "gone" orto keep the mark for any length of time -- that is left to thediscretion of the server owner.10.4.12 411 Length RequiredThe server refuses to accept the request without a defined Content-Length. The client MAY repeat the request if it adds a validContent-Length header field containing the length of the message-bodyin the request message.10.4.13 412 Precondition FailedThe precondition given in one or more of the request-header fieldsevaluated to false when it was tested on the server. This responsecode allows the client to place preconditions on the current resourcemetainformation (header field data) and thus prevent the requestedmethod from being applied to a resource other than the one intended.Fielding, et al. Standards Track [Page 68]RFC 2616 HTTP/1.1 June 199910.4.14 413 Request Entity Too LargeThe server is refusing to process a request because the requestentity is larger than the server is willing or able to process. Theserver MAY close the connection to prevent the client from continuingthe request.If the condition is temporary, the server SHOULD include a Retry-After header field to indicate that it is temporary and after whattime the client MAY try again.
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: Fielding, et al. Standards Track [P
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 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 70 and 71: The response MUST include the follo
Page 72 and 73: If the client is sending data, a se
Page 76 and 77: 10.4.15 414 Request-URI Too LongThe
Page 78 and 79: 10.5.5 504 Gateway TimeoutThe serve
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 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:
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 176 and 177:
Implementation and Analysis", RFC 1
Page 178 and 179:
University of California, IrvineIrv
Page 180 and 181:
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:
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?