< draft-reschke-http-status-308-04.txt   draft-reschke-http-status-308-05.txt >
Network Working Group J. Reschke Network Working Group J. Reschke
Internet-Draft greenbytes Internet-Draft greenbytes
Intended status: Experimental February 8, 2012 Intended status: Experimental February 14, 2012
Expires: August 11, 2012 Expires: August 17, 2012
The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Status Code 308 (Permanent The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Status Code 308 (Permanent
Redirect) Redirect)
draft-reschke-http-status-308-04 draft-reschke-http-status-308-05
Abstract Abstract
This document specifies the additional HyperText Transfer Protocol This document specifies the additional HyperText Transfer Protocol
(HTTP) Status Code 308 (Permanent Redirect). (HTTP) Status Code 308 (Permanent Redirect).
Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor before publication) Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor before publication)
Distribution of this document is unlimited. Although this is not a Distribution of this document is unlimited. Although this is not a
work item of the HTTPbis Working Group, comments should be sent to work item of the HTTPbis Working Group, comments should be sent to
skipping to change at page 2, line 4 skipping to change at page 2, line 4
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 11, 2012. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 17, 2012.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 27 skipping to change at page 2, line 27
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. 308 Permanent Redirect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. 308 Permanent Redirect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Appendix A. Implementations (to be removed by RFC Editor Appendix A. Implementations (to be removed by RFC Editor
before publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 before publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Appendix B. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before Appendix B. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before
publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
B.1. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-00 . . . . . . . . . . 6 B.1. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-00 . . . . . . . . . . 6
B.2. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-01 . . . . . . . . . . 6 B.2. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-01 . . . . . . . . . . 6
B.3. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-02 . . . . . . . . . . 6 B.3. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-02 . . . . . . . . . . 7
B.4. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-03 . . . . . . . . . . 6 B.4. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-03 . . . . . . . . . . 7
B.5. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-04 . . . . . . . . . . 7
Appendix C. Resolved issues (to be removed by RFC Editor Appendix C. Resolved issues (to be removed by RFC Editor
before publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 before publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
C.1. uaconfirm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 C.1. missingconsiderations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Appendix D. Open issues (to be removed by RFC Editor prior to Appendix D. Open issues (to be removed by RFC Editor prior to
publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
D.1. edit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 D.1. edit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
HTTP defines a set of status codes for the purpose of redirecting a HTTP defines a set of status codes for the purpose of redirecting a
request to a different URI ([RFC3986]). The history of these status request to a different URI ([RFC3986]). The history of these status
codes is summarized in Section 7.3 of codes is summarized in Section 7.3 of
[draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics], which also classifies the existing [draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics], which also classifies the existing
skipping to change at page 3, line 46 skipping to change at page 3, line 46
3. 308 Permanent Redirect 3. 308 Permanent Redirect
The target resource has been assigned a new permanent URI and any The target resource has been assigned a new permanent URI and any
future references to this resource SHOULD use one of the returned future references to this resource SHOULD use one of the returned
URIs. Clients with link editing capabilities ought to automatically URIs. Clients with link editing capabilities ought to automatically
re-link references to the effective request URI (Section 4.3 of re-link references to the effective request URI (Section 4.3 of
[draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging]) to one or more of the new [draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging]) to one or more of the new
references returned by the server, where possible. references returned by the server, where possible.
The permanent URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the Caches MAY use a heuristic (see [draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache],
Section 2.3.1.1) to determine freshness for 308 responses.
The new permanent URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the
response ([draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics], Section 9.5). A response ([draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics], Section 9.5). A
response payload can contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink response payload can contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink
to the new URI(s). to the new URI(s).
4. Deployment Considerations 4. Deployment Considerations
Section 4 of [draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics] requires recipients to Section 4 of [draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics] requires recipients to
treat unknown 3xx status codes the same way as status code 300 treat unknown 3xx status codes the same way as status code 300
Multiple Choices ([draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics], Section 7.3.1). Multiple Choices ([draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics], Section 7.3.1).
Thus, servers will not be able to rely on automatic redirection Thus, servers will not be able to rely on automatic redirection
happening similar to status codes 301, 302, or 307. happening similar to status codes 301, 302, or 307.
Therefore, initial use of status code 308 will be restricted to cases Therefore, initial use of status code 308 will be restricted to cases
where the server has sufficient confidence in the clients where the server has sufficient confidence in the clients
understanding the new code, or when a fallback to the semantics of understanding the new code, or when a fallback to the semantics of
status code 300 is not problematic. status code 300 is not problematic.
Note that existing user agents will emulate a refresh when Note that many existing HTML-based user agents will emulate a refresh
encountering an HTML <meta> refresh directive. This can be used as when encountering an HTML <meta> refresh directive. This can be used
another fallback. as another fallback. For example:
For example: Client request:
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: example.com
Server response:
HTTP/1.1 308 Permanent Redirect HTTP/1.1 308 Permanent Redirect
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Location: http://example.com/new Location: http://example.com/new
Content-Length: 443 Content-Length: 454
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd"> "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html> <html>
<head> <head>
<title>Permanent Redirect</title> <title>Permanent Redirect</title>
<meta http-equiv="refresh" <meta http-equiv="refresh"
content="0; url=http://example.com/new"> content="0; url=http://example.com/new">
</head> </head>
<body> <body>
<p> <p>
The document has been moved to The document has been moved to
<a href="http://example.com/new">http://example.com/new</a>. <a href="http://example.com/new"
>http://example.com/new</a>.
</p> </p>
</body> </body>
</html> </html>
5. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
All security considerations that apply to HTTP redirects apply to the All security considerations that apply to HTTP redirects apply to the
308 status code as well (see Section 11 of 308 status code as well (see Section 11 of
[draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics]). [draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics]).
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
The registration below shall be added to the HTTP Status Code The registration below shall be added to the HTTP Status Code
Registry (defined in Section 4.2 of [draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics] Registry (defined in Section 4.2 of [draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics]
and located at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/http-status-codes>): and located at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/http-status-codes>):
+-------+--------------------+-----------+ +-------+--------------------+---------------------------------+
| Value | Description | Reference | | Value | Description | Reference |
+-------+--------------------+-----------+ +-------+--------------------+---------------------------------+
| 308 | Permanent Redirect | Section 3 | | 308 | Permanent Redirect | Section 3 of this specification |
+-------+--------------------+-----------+ +-------+--------------------+---------------------------------+
7. Acknowledgements 7. Acknowledgements
The definition for the new status code 308 re-uses text from the The definition for the new status code 308 re-uses text from the
HTTP/1.1 definitions of status codes 301 and 307. HTTP/1.1 definitions of status codes 301 and 307.
Furthermore, thanks to Bjoern Hoehrmann and Subramanian Moonesamy for Furthermore, thanks to Cyrus Daboo, Bjoern Hoehrmann, Subramanian
feedback on this document. Moonesamy, and Peter Saint-Andre for feedback on this document.
8. Normative References 8. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in
RFCs to Indicate Requirement RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
March 1997. March 1997.
[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and [RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and
L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource
skipping to change at page 6, line 6 skipping to change at page 6, line 12
[draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics] Fielding, R., Ed., Gettys, J., [draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics] Fielding, R., Ed., Gettys, J.,
Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., Masinter, Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., Masinter,
L., Leach, P., Berners-Lee, T., L., Leach, P., Berners-Lee, T.,
Lafon, Y., Ed., and J. Reschke, Lafon, Y., Ed., and J. Reschke,
Ed., "HTTP/1.1, part 2: Message Ed., "HTTP/1.1, part 2: Message
Semantics", Semantics",
draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-18 draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-18
(work in progress), January 2012. (work in progress), January 2012.
[draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache] Fielding, R., Ed., Gettys, J.,
Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., Masinter,
L., Leach, P., Berners-Lee, T.,
Lafon, Y., Ed., Nottingham, M.,
Ed., and J. Reschke, Ed.,
"HTTP/1.1, part 6: Caching",
draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-18
(work in progress), January 2012.
[1] <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org> [1] <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
[2] <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=subscribe> [2] <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=subscribe>
Appendix A. Implementations (to be removed by RFC Editor before Appendix A. Implementations (to be removed by RFC Editor before
publication) publication)
Chrome: Feature requested in Chromium Issue 109012 Chrome: Feature requested in Chromium Issue 109012
(<http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=109012>). (<http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=109012>).
Curl (the library): no change was needed (test case: Curl (the library): no change was needed (test case:
<https://github.com/bagder/curl/blob/master/tests/data/test1325>). <https://github.com/bagder/curl/blob/master/tests/data/test1325>).
Firefox: Feature requested in Bugzilla bug 714302 Firefox: Feature requested in Bugzilla bug 714302
(<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=714302>), patch (<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=714302>), patch
available. available.
Safari: Safari automatically redirects 3xx status codes when a Safari: automatically redirects 3xx status codes when a Location
Location header field is present, thus no change is needed. header field is present, but does not preserve the request method.
Appendix B. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication) Appendix B. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)
B.1. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-00 B.1. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-00
Updated HTTPbis reference. Added Appendix A. Added and resolved Updated HTTPbis reference. Added Appendix A. Added and resolved
issue "refresh". issue "refresh".
B.2. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-01 B.2. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-01
skipping to change at page 6, line 47 skipping to change at page 7, line 15
B.3. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-02 B.3. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-02
Tune HTML example. Expand "Implementations" section. Added and Tune HTML example. Expand "Implementations" section. Added and
resolved issue "respformat" (align with new proposed text for 307 in resolved issue "respformat" (align with new proposed text for 307 in
HTTPbis P2). HTTPbis P2).
B.4. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-03 B.4. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-03
Added and resolved issue "uaconfirm". Added and resolved issue "uaconfirm".
B.5. Since draft-reschke-http-status-308-04
Added and resolved issue "missingconsiderations". Added request
message to example. Updated the Safari implementation note.
Appendix C. Resolved issues (to be removed by RFC Editor before Appendix C. Resolved issues (to be removed by RFC Editor before
publication) publication)
Issues that were either rejected or resolved in this version of this Issues that were either rejected or resolved in this version of this
document. document.
C.1. uaconfirm C.1. missingconsiderations
In Section 3: In Section 3:
Type: change Type: change
julian.reschke@greenbytes.de (2012-02-03): The requirement about UA stpeter@stpeter.im (2012-02-10): According to HTTPbis Part 2, need to
prompts is subject to an open HTTPbis ticket explain the request conditions, interactions with response headers,
(http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/238), and the text and implications for caches. If certain default behavior is assumed,
should be aligned with whatever the resolution is. it would be good to make that explicit.
Resolution (2012-02-08): Align with the proposed fix for the HTTPbis Resolution (2012-02-13): Added missing caching considerations.
issue by removing the text from the status code definition (in
HTTPbis, a relaxed variant is being added to the description of 3xx
in general).
Appendix D. Open issues (to be removed by RFC Editor prior to Appendix D. Open issues (to be removed by RFC Editor prior to
publication) publication)
D.1. edit D.1. edit
Type: edit Type: edit
julian.reschke@greenbytes.de (2011-04-15): Umbrella issue for julian.reschke@greenbytes.de (2011-04-15): Umbrella issue for
editorial fixes/enhancements. editorial fixes/enhancements.
 End of changes. 20 change blocks. 
33 lines changed or deleted 54 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/
X-Generator: pyht 0.35