Individual Submission J. Snell
Internet-Draft March 28, 2011
Intended status: Informational
Expires: September 29, 2011
Prefer Header for HTTP
draft-snell-http-prefer-03
Abstract
This specification defines an HTTP header that can be used by a
client to request that certain behaviors be implemented by a server
while processing a request.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 29, 2011.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Snell Expires September 29, 2011 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft HTTP Prefer March 2011
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. The Prefer Request Header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. The Preference-Applied Response Header . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. The "return-accepted" Preference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. The "return-content" Preference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. The "return-no-content" Preference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. The "return-status" Preference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8.1. The Registry of Preferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Snell Expires September 29, 2011 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft HTTP Prefer March 2011
1. Introduction
This specification defines a new HTTP header that can be used by a
client to request that certain behaviors be implemented by a server
while processing a request.
In this document, the key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED",
"SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY",
and "OPTIONAL" are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
2. The Prefer Request Header
The Prefer request-header is used to indicate that particular server
behaviors are preferred by the client, but not required for
successful completion of the request. Prefer is similar in nature to
the Expect header defined by [RFC2616] with the exception that
servers are allowed to ignore stated preferences.
Prefer = "Prefer" ":" 1#preference
preference = "return-no-content" |
"return-content" |
"return-status" |
preference-extension
preference-extension = token [ "=" ( token | quoted-string )
*prefer-params ]
prefer-params = ";" token [ "=" ( token | quoted-string ) ]
This header is defined with an extensible syntax to allow for future
values included in the Registry of Preferences (Section 8.1)). A
server that does not recognize or is unable to comply with particular
preference values in the Prefer header of a request MUST ignore those
values and MUST NOT stop processing or signal an error.
Comparison of preference values is case-insensitive for unquoted
tokens and is case-sensitive for quoted-string preference-extensions.
An HTTP proxy MAY choose to honor a preference even if the origin
server does not. The Prefer request-header MUST be forwarded by the
proxy if the request is forwarded.
Note that the application of a preference by the server MAY affect
the caching characteristics of the response.
Snell Expires September 29, 2011 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft HTTP Prefer March 2011
3. The Preference-Applied Response Header
The Preference-Applied response header MAY be included in the
response message to indicate which Prefer request header values were
honored by the server and applied to the request.
Preference-Applied = "Preference-Applied" ":" 1#preference
4. The "return-accepted" Preference
The "return-accepted" token indicates that the client prefers that
the server respond with a 202 Accepted response indicating that the
request has been accepted for processing.
5. The "return-content" Preference
The "return-content" token indicates that the client prefers that the
server include an entity representing the current state of the
resource in the response to a successful request.
6. The "return-no-content" Preference
The "return-no-content" token indicates that the client prefers that
the server not include an entity in the response to a successful
request. Typically, such responses would use the 204 No Content
status code as defined in Section 10.2.5 of [RFC2616], but other
status codes can be used as appropriate.
7. The "return-status" Preference
The "return-status" token indicates that the client prefers that the
server include an entity describing the status of the request in the
response to a successful request.
8. IANA Considerations
The 'Prefer' and 'Preference-Applied' headers should be added to the
permanent registry (see [RFC3864]).
Snell Expires September 29, 2011 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft HTTP Prefer March 2011
Header field name: Prefer
Applicable Protocol: HTTP
Status:
Author/Change controller: IETF
Specification document: this specification
Header field name: Preference-Applied
Applicable Protocol: HTTP
Status:
Author/Change controller: IETF
Specification document: this specification
8.1. The Registry of Preferences
This registry is maintained by IANA and initially contains the
values: "return-accepted", "return-content", "return-no-content" and
"return-status". New assignments are subjects to IESG approval, as
outlined in [RFC2434]. Requests should be made by email to IANA,
which will then forward the request to the IESG, requesting approval.
The request should use the following template:
o Preference: (A value for the Prefer request header that conforms
to the syntax rule given in Section 2)
o Description:
o Expected server behavior:
o Security considerations:
9. Security Considerations
Specific preferences requested by a client can introduce security
considerations and concerns beyond those discussed in [RFC2616].
Implementors must refer to the specifications and descriptions of
those preferences to determine the security considerations relevant
to each.
10. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
October 1998.
[RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H.,
Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext
Snell Expires September 29, 2011 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft HTTP Prefer March 2011
Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.
[RFC3864] Klyne, G., Nottingham, M., and J. Mogul, "Registration
Procedures for Message Header Fields", BCP 90, RFC 3864,
September 2004.
Author's Address
James M Snell
Phone:
Email: jasnell@gmail.com
URI:
Snell Expires September 29, 2011 [Page 6]
