Source: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/1536
Timestamp: 2014-11-01 10:59:35
Document Index: 85136864

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 2', 'art 2', 'art3', 'art3', 'art 3', 'art3']

Changeset 1536 – httpbis
2012-02-16 14:26:09
460460 } 461461 @bottom-center { 462 content: "Expires August 11, 2012"; 462 content: "Expires August 19, 2012"; 463463 } 464464 @bottom-right { …
512512 <meta name="dct.creator" content="Reschke, J. F."> 513513 <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-latest"> 514 <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2012-02-08"> 514 <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2012-02-16"> 515515 <meta name="dct.replaces" content="urn:ietf:rfc:2616"> 516516 <meta name="dct.abstract" content="The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is an application-level protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypertext information systems. HTTP has been in use by the World Wide Web global information initiative since 1990. This document is Part 2 of the seven-part specification that defines the protocol referred to as &#34;HTTP/1.1&#34; and, taken together, obsoletes RFC 2616. Part 2 defines the semantics of HTTP messages as expressed by request methods, request header fields, response status codes, and response header fields."> …
543543 </tr> 544544 <tr> 545 <td class="left">Expires: August 11, 2012</td> 545 <td class="left">Expires: August 19, 2012</td> 546546 <td class="right">HP</td> 547547 </tr> …
596596 <tr> 597597 <td class="left"></td> 598 <td class="right">February 8, 2012</td> 598 <td class="right">February 16, 2012</td> 599599 </tr> 600600 </tbody> …
626626 in progress”. 627627 </p> 628 <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on August 11, 2012.</p> 628 <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on August 19, 2012.</p> 629629 <h1><a id="rfc.copyrightnotice" href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1> 630630 <p>Copyright © 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.</p> …
775775 <li>11.1&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#security.sensitive">Transfer of Sensitive Information</a></li> 776776 <li>11.2&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#encoding.sensitive.information.in.uris">Encoding Sensitive Information in URIs</a></li> 777 <li>11.3&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#location.spoofing">Location Headers and Spoofing</a></li> 777 <li>11.3&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#location.spoofing-leakage">Location Header Fields: Spoofing and Information Leakage</a></li> 778778 <li>11.4&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.section.11.4">Security Considerations for CONNECT</a></li> 779779 </ul> …
23432343 <div id="rfc.iref.h.6"></div> 23442344 <h2 id="rfc.section.9.5"><a href="#rfc.section.9.5">9.5</a>&nbsp;<a id="header.location" href="#header.location">Location</a></h2> 2345 <p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.1">The "Location" header field is used to identify a newly created resource, or to redirect the recipient to a different location 2346 for completion of the request. 2347 </p> 2348 <p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.2">For 201 (Created) responses, the Location is the URI of the new resource which was created by the request. For 3xx responses, 2345 <p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.1">The "Location" header field <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> be sent in responses to refer to a specific resource in accordance with the semantics of the status code. 2346 </p> 2347 <div id="rfc.figure.u.23"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.30"></span> <a href="#header.location" class="smpl">Location</a> = <a href="#abnf.dependencies" class="smpl">URI-reference</a> 2348</pre><p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.3">For 201 (Created) responses, the Location is the URI of the new resource which was created by the request. For 3xx responses, 23492349 the location <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> indicate the server's preferred URI for automatic redirection to the resource. 23502350 </p> 2351 <p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.3">The field value consists of a single URI-reference. When it has the form of a relative reference (<a href="#RFC3986" id="rfc.xref.RFC3986.1"><cite title="Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax">[RFC3986]</cite></a>, <a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-4.2">Section 4.2</a>), the final value is computed by resolving it against the effective request URI (<a href="#RFC3986" id="rfc.xref.RFC3986.2"><cite title="Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax">[RFC3986]</cite></a>, <a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-5">Section 5</a>). 2352 </p> 2353 <div id="rfc.figure.u.23"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.30"></span> <a href="#header.location" class="smpl">Location</a> = <a href="#abnf.dependencies" class="smpl">URI-reference</a> 2354 </pre><div id="rfc.figure.u.24"></div> 2355 <p>Examples are:</p> <pre class="text"> Location: http://www.example.org/pub/WWW/People.html#tim 2356 </pre><div id="rfc.figure.u.25"></div><pre class="text"> Location: /index.html 2357 </pre><div class="note" id="rfc.section.9.5.p.7"> 2351 <p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.4">The field value consists of a single URI-reference. When it has the form of a relative reference (<a href="#RFC3986" id="rfc.xref.RFC3986.1"><cite title="Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax">[RFC3986]</cite></a>, <a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-4.2">Section 4.2</a>), the final value is computed by resolving it against the effective request URI (<a href="#RFC3986" id="rfc.xref.RFC3986.2"><cite title="Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax">[RFC3986]</cite></a>, <a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-5">Section 5</a>). If the original URI, as navigated to by the user agent, did contain a fragment identifier, and the final value does not, 2352 then the original URI's fragment identifier is added to the final value. 2353 </p> 2354 <div id="rfc.figure.u.24"></div> 2355 <p>For example, the original URI "http://www.example.org/~tim", combined with a field value given as:</p> <pre class="text"> Location: /pub/WWW/People.html#tim 2356</pre> <p>would result in a final value of "http://www.example.org/pub/WWW/People.html#tim"</p> 2357 <div id="rfc.figure.u.25"></div> 2358 <p>An original URI "http://www.example.org/index.html#larry", combined with a field value given as:</p> <pre class="text"> Location: http://www.example.net/index.html 2359</pre> <p>would result in a final value of "http://www.example.net/index.html#larry", preserving the original fragment identifier.</p> 2360 <div class="note" id="rfc.section.9.5.p.7"> 23582361 <p> <b>Note:</b> Some recipients attempt to recover from Location fields that are not valid URI references. This specification does not mandate 23592362 or define such processing, but does allow it (see <a href="#intro.conformance.and.error.handling" title="Conformance and Error Handling">Section&nbsp;1.1</a>). …
23642367 </p> 23652368 <div class="note" id="rfc.section.9.5.p.9"> 2366 <p> <b>Note:</b> This specification does not define precedence rules for the case where the original URI, as navigated to by the user agent, 2367 and the Location header field value both contain fragment identifiers. Thus be aware that including fragment identifiers might 2368 inconvenience anyone relying on the semantics of the original URI's fragment identifier. 2369 </p> 2370 </div> 2371 <div class="note" id="rfc.section.9.5.p.10"> 23722369 <p> <b>Note:</b> The Content-Location header field (<a href="p3-payload.html#header.content-location" title="Content-Location">Section 6.7</a> of <a href="#Part3" id="rfc.xref.Part3.13"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 3: Message Payload and Content Negotiation">[Part3]</cite></a>) differs from Location in that the Content-Location identifies the most specific resource corresponding to the enclosed representation. 23732370 It is therefore possible for a response to contain header fields for both Location and Content-Location. …
29042901 Such services can use POST-based form submission instead. 29052902 </p> 2906 <h2 id="rfc.section.11.3"><a href="#rfc.section.11.3">11.3</a>&nbsp;<a id="location.spoofing" href="#location.spoofing">Location Headers and Spoofing</a></h2> 2903 <h2 id="rfc.section.11.3"><a href="#rfc.section.11.3">11.3</a>&nbsp;<a id="location.spoofing-leakage" href="#location.spoofing-leakage">Location Header Fields: Spoofing and Information Leakage</a></h2> 29072904 <p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.1">If a single server supports multiple organizations that do not trust one another, then it <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> check the values of Location and Content-Location header fields in responses that are generated under control of said organizations 29082905 to make sure that they do not attempt to invalidate resources over which they have no authority. 2906 </p> 2907 <p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.2">Furthermore, appending the fragment identifier from one URI to another one obtained from a Location header field might leak 2908 confidential information to the target server — although the fragment identifier is not transmitted in the final request, 2909 it might be visible to the user agent through other means, such as scripting. 29092910 </p> 29102911 <h2 id="rfc.section.11.4"><a href="#rfc.section.11.4">11.4</a>&nbsp;Security Considerations for CONNECT …
34913492 <ul> 34923493 <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/238">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/238</a>&gt;: "Requirements for user intervention during redirects" 3494 </li> 3495 <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/295">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/295</a>&gt;: "Applying original fragment to 'plain' redirected URI" 34933496 </li> 34943497 <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/302">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/302</a>&gt;: "Misplaced text on connection handling in p2" draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p2-semantics.xml
25862586 <x:anchor-alias value="Location"/> 25872587<t> 2588 The "Location" header field is used to identify a newly created 2589 resource, or to redirect the recipient to a different location for 2590 completion of the request. 2591 </t> 2588 The "Location" header field &MAY; be sent in responses to refer to 2589 a specific resource in accordance with the semantics of the status 2590 code. 2591</t> 2592<figure><artwork type="abnf2616"><iref primary="true" item="Grammar" subitem="Location"/> 2593 <x:ref>Location</x:ref> = <x:ref>URI-reference</x:ref> 2594</artwork></figure> 25922595<t> 25932596 For 201 (Created) responses, the Location is the URI of the new resource …
26002603 of a relative reference (<xref target="RFC3986" x:fmt="," x:sec="4.2"/>), 26012604 the final value is computed by resolving it against the effective request 2602 URI (<xref target="RFC3986" x:fmt="," x:sec="5"/>). 2603 </t> 2604 <figure><artwork type="abnf2616"><iref primary="true" item="Grammar" subitem="Location"/> 2605 <x:ref>Location</x:ref> = <x:ref>URI-reference</x:ref> 2606 </artwork></figure> 2605 URI (<xref target="RFC3986" x:fmt="," x:sec="5"/>). If the original URI, as 2606 navigated to by the user agent, did contain a fragment identifier, and the 2607 final value does not, then the original URI's fragment identifier is added 2608 to the final value. 2609</t> 26072610<figure> 2608 <preamble>Examples are:</preamble><!--DO NOT DARE changing the vertical spacing below, it's necessary this way for xml2rfc--> 2611<preamble>For example, the original URI "http://www.example.org/~tim", combined with a field value given as:</preamble><!--DO NOT DARE changing the vertical spacing below, it's necessary this way for xml2rfc--> 26092612<artwork type="example"> 2610 Location: http://www.example.org/pub/WWW/People.html#tim 2611 </artwork></figure><figure><artwork type="example"> Location: /index.html 2612 </artwork></figure> 2613 Location: /pub/WWW/People.html#tim 2614</artwork> 2615<postamble>would result in a final value of "http://www.example.org/pub/WWW/People.html#tim"</postamble> 2616</figure> 2617<figure> 2618<preamble>An original URI "http://www.example.org/index.html#larry", combined with a field value given as:</preamble><!--DO NOT DARE changing the vertical spacing below, it's necessary this way for xml2rfc--> 2619<artwork type="example"> 2620 Location: http://www.example.net/index.html 2621</artwork> 2622<postamble>would result in a final value of "http://www.example.net/index.html#larry", preserving the original fragment identifier.</postamble> 2623</figure> 26132624<x:note> 26142625 <t> …
26242635 created resource. 26252636</t> 2626 <x:note> 2627 <t> 2628 <x:h>Note:</x:h> This specification does not define precedence rules 2629 for the case where the original URI, as navigated to by the user 2630 agent, and the Location header field value both contain fragment 2631 identifiers. Thus be aware that including fragment identifiers might 2632 inconvenience anyone relying on the semantics of the original URI's 2633 fragment identifier. 2634 </t> 2635 </x:note> 26362637<x:note> 26372638 <t> …
32843285</section> 32853286 3286 <section title="Location Headers and Spoofing" anchor="location.spoofing"> 3287<section title="Location Header Fields: Spoofing and Information Leakage" anchor="location.spoofing-leakage"> 32873288<t> 32883289 If a single server supports multiple organizations that do not trust …
32913292 said organizations to make sure that they do not attempt to 32923293 invalidate resources over which they have no authority. 3294</t> 3295<t> 3296 Furthermore, appending the fragment identifier from one URI to another 3297 one obtained from a Location header field might leak confidential 3298 information to the target server &mdash; although the fragment identifier is 3299 not transmitted in the final request, it might be visible to the user agent 3300 through other means, such as scripting. 32933301</t> 32943302</section> …
46584666 </t> 46594667 <t> 4668 <eref target="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/295"/>: 4669 "Applying original fragment to 'plain' redirected URI" 4670 </t> 4671 <t> 46604672 <eref target="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/302"/>: 46614673 "Misplaced text on connection handling in p2" Note: See TracChangeset