source: draft-ietf-httpbis/01/p3-payload.html @ 2726

Last change on this file since 2726 was 2726, checked in by julian.reschke@…, 6 years ago

update to latest version of rfc2629.xslt, regen all HTML

  • Property svn:eol-style set to native
  • Property svn:mime-type set to text/html;charset=utf-8
File size: 152.7 KB
Line 
1<!DOCTYPE html
2  PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN">
3<html lang="en">
4   <head profile="http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
5      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
6      <title>HTTP/1.1, part 3: Message Payload and Content Negotiation</title><style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
7a {
8  text-decoration: none;
9}
10a.smpl {
11  color: black;
12}
13a:hover {
14  text-decoration: underline;
15}
16a:active {
17  text-decoration: underline;
18}
19address {
20  margin-top: 1em;
21  margin-left: 2em;
22  font-style: normal;
23}
24body {
25  color: black;
26  font-family: cambria, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
27  font-size: 11pt;
28  margin-right: 2em;
29}
30cite {
31  font-style: normal;
32}
33dl {
34  margin-left: 2em;
35}
36ul.empty {
37  list-style-type: none;
38}
39ul.empty li {
40  margin-top: .5em;
41}
42dl p {
43  margin-left: 0em;
44}
45dt {
46  margin-top: .5em;
47}
48h1 {
49  font-size: 130%;
50  line-height: 21pt;
51  page-break-after: avoid;
52}
53h1.np {
54  page-break-before: always;
55}
56h2 {
57  font-size: 120%;
58  line-height: 15pt;
59  page-break-after: avoid;
60}
61h3 {
62  font-size: 110%;
63  page-break-after: avoid;
64}
65h4, h5, h6 {
66  page-break-after: avoid;
67}
68h1 a, h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
69  color: black;
70}
71img {
72  margin-left: 3em;
73}
74li {
75  margin-left: 2em;
76}
77ol {
78  margin-left: 2em;
79}
80ol.la {
81  list-style-type: lower-alpha;
82}
83ol.ua {
84  list-style-type: upper-alpha;
85}
86ol p {
87  margin-left: 0em;
88}
89p {
90  margin-left: 2em;
91}
92pre {
93  margin-left: 3em;
94  background-color: lightyellow;
95  padding: .25em;
96  page-break-inside: avoid;
97}
98pre.text2 {
99  border-style: dotted;
100  border-width: 1px;
101  background-color: #f0f0f0;
102  width: 69em;
103}
104pre.inline {
105  background-color: white;
106  padding: 0em;
107}
108pre.text {
109  border-style: dotted;
110  border-width: 1px;
111  background-color: #f8f8f8;
112  width: 69em;
113}
114pre.drawing {
115  border-style: solid;
116  border-width: 1px;
117  background-color: #f8f8f8;
118  padding: 2em;
119}
120table {
121  margin-left: 2em;
122}
123table.header {
124  border-spacing: 1px;
125  width: 95%;
126  font-size: 11pt;
127  color: white;
128}
129td.top {
130  vertical-align: top;
131}
132td.topnowrap {
133  vertical-align: top;
134  white-space: nowrap;
135}
136table.header td {
137  background-color: gray;
138  width: 50%;
139}
140table.header a {
141  color: white;
142}
143td.reference {
144  vertical-align: top;
145  white-space: nowrap;
146  padding-right: 1em;
147}
148thead {
149  display:table-header-group;
150}
151ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
152  list-style: none;
153  margin-left: 1.5em;
154  padding-left: 0em;
155}
156ul.toc li {
157  line-height: 150%;
158  font-weight: bold;
159  margin-left: 0em;
160}
161ul.toc li li {
162  line-height: normal;
163  font-weight: normal;
164  font-size: 10pt;
165  margin-left: 0em;
166}
167li.excluded {
168  font-size: 0pt;
169}
170ul p {
171  margin-left: 0em;
172}
173.title, .filename, h1, h2, h3, h4 {
174  font-family: candara, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
175}
176samp, tt, code, pre {
177  font: consolas, monospace;
178}
179ul.ind, ul.ind ul {
180  list-style: none;
181  margin-left: 1.5em;
182  padding-left: 0em;
183  page-break-before: avoid;
184}
185ul.ind li {
186  font-weight: bold;
187  line-height: 200%;
188  margin-left: 0em;
189}
190ul.ind li li {
191  font-weight: normal;
192  line-height: 150%;
193  margin-left: 0em;
194}
195.avoidbreak {
196  page-break-inside: avoid;
197}
198.bcp14 {
199  font-style: normal;
200  text-transform: lowercase;
201  font-variant: small-caps;
202}
203.comment {
204  background-color: yellow;
205}
206.center {
207  text-align: center;
208}
209.error {
210  color: red;
211  font-style: italic;
212  font-weight: bold;
213}
214.figure {
215  font-weight: bold;
216  text-align: center;
217  font-size: 10pt;
218}
219.filename {
220  color: #333333;
221  font-size: 75%;
222  font-weight: bold;
223  line-height: 21pt;
224  text-align: center;
225}
226.fn {
227  font-weight: bold;
228}
229.left {
230  text-align: left;
231}
232.right {
233  text-align: right;
234}
235.title {
236  color: green;
237  font-size: 150%;
238  line-height: 18pt;
239  font-weight: bold;
240  text-align: center;
241  margin-top: 36pt;
242}
243.warning {
244  font-size: 130%;
245  background-color: yellow;
246}
247
248
249@media print {
250  .noprint {
251    display: none;
252  }
253
254  a {
255    color: black;
256    text-decoration: none;
257  }
258
259  table.header {
260    width: 90%;
261  }
262
263  td.header {
264    width: 50%;
265    color: black;
266    background-color: white;
267    vertical-align: top;
268    font-size: 110%;
269  }
270
271  ul.toc a:nth-child(2)::after {
272    content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
273  }
274
275  ul.ind li li a {
276    content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
277  }
278
279  .print2col {
280    column-count: 2;
281    -moz-column-count: 2;
282    column-fill: auto;
283  }
284}
285
286@page {
287  @top-left {
288       content: "Internet-Draft";
289  }
290  @top-right {
291       content: "January 2008";
292  }
293  @top-center {
294       content: "HTTP/1.1, Part 3";
295  }
296  @bottom-left {
297       content: "Fielding, et al.";
298  }
299  @bottom-center {
300       content: "Expires July 15, 2008";
301  }
302  @bottom-right {
303       content: "[Page " counter(page) "]";
304  }
305}
306
307@page:first {
308    @top-left {
309      content: normal;
310    }
311    @top-right {
312      content: normal;
313    }
314    @top-center {
315      content: normal;
316    }
317}
318</style><link rel="Contents" href="#rfc.toc">
319      <link rel="Author" href="#rfc.authors">
320      <link rel="Copyright" href="#rfc.copyright">
321      <link rel="Index" href="#rfc.index">
322      <link rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction" href="#rfc.section.1">
323      <link rel="Chapter" title="2 Protocol Parameters" href="#rfc.section.2">
324      <link rel="Chapter" title="3 Entity" href="#rfc.section.3">
325      <link rel="Chapter" title="4 Content Negotiation" href="#rfc.section.4">
326      <link rel="Chapter" title="5 Header Field Definitions" href="#rfc.section.5">
327      <link rel="Chapter" title="6 IANA Considerations" href="#rfc.section.6">
328      <link rel="Chapter" title="7 Security Considerations" href="#rfc.section.7">
329      <link rel="Chapter" title="8 Acknowledgments" href="#rfc.section.8">
330      <link rel="Chapter" href="#rfc.section.9" title="9 References">
331      <link rel="Appendix" title="A Differences Between HTTP Entities and RFC 2045 Entities" href="#rfc.section.A">
332      <link rel="Appendix" title="B Additional Features" href="#rfc.section.B">
333      <link rel="Appendix" title="C Compatibility with Previous Versions" href="#rfc.section.C">
334      <link rel="Appendix" title="D Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)" href="#rfc.section.D">
335      <meta name="generator" content="http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2629.xslt, Revision 1.640, 2014/06/13 12:42:58, XSLT vendor: SAXON 8.9 from Saxonica http://www.saxonica.com/">
336      <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/">
337      <meta name="dct.creator" content="Fielding, R.">
338      <meta name="dct.creator" content="Gettys, J.">
339      <meta name="dct.creator" content="Mogul, J.">
340      <meta name="dct.creator" content="Frystyk, H.">
341      <meta name="dct.creator" content="Masinter, L.">
342      <meta name="dct.creator" content="Leach, P.">
343      <meta name="dct.creator" content="Berners-Lee, T.">
344      <meta name="dct.creator" content="Lafon, Y.">
345      <meta name="dct.creator" content="Reschke, J. F.">
346      <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-01">
347      <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2008-01-12">
348      <meta name="dct.replaces" content="urn:ietf:rfc:2616">
349      <meta name="dct.abstract" content="The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is an application-level protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypermedia information systems. HTTP has been in use by the World Wide Web global information initiative since 1990. This document is Part 3 of the seven-part specification that defines the protocol referred to as &#34;HTTP/1.1&#34; and, taken together, obsoletes RFC 2616. Part 3 defines HTTP message content, metadata, and content negotiation.">
350      <meta name="description" content="The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is an application-level protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypermedia information systems. HTTP has been in use by the World Wide Web global information initiative since 1990. This document is Part 3 of the seven-part specification that defines the protocol referred to as &#34;HTTP/1.1&#34; and, taken together, obsoletes RFC 2616. Part 3 defines HTTP message content, metadata, and content negotiation.">
351   </head>
352   <body>
353      <table class="header">
354         <tbody>
355            <tr>
356               <td class="left">Network Working Group</td>
357               <td class="right">R. Fielding, Editor</td>
358            </tr>
359            <tr>
360               <td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
361               <td class="right">Day Software</td>
362            </tr>
363            <tr>
364               <td class="left">Obsoletes: <a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616">2616</a> (if approved)
365               </td>
366               <td class="right">J. Gettys</td>
367            </tr>
368            <tr>
369               <td class="left">Intended status: Standards Track</td>
370               <td class="right">One Laptop per Child</td>
371            </tr>
372            <tr>
373               <td class="left">Expires: July 15, 2008</td>
374               <td class="right">J. Mogul</td>
375            </tr>
376            <tr>
377               <td class="left"></td>
378               <td class="right">HP</td>
379            </tr>
380            <tr>
381               <td class="left"></td>
382               <td class="right">H. Frystyk</td>
383            </tr>
384            <tr>
385               <td class="left"></td>
386               <td class="right">Microsoft</td>
387            </tr>
388            <tr>
389               <td class="left"></td>
390               <td class="right">L. Masinter</td>
391            </tr>
392            <tr>
393               <td class="left"></td>
394               <td class="right">Adobe Systems</td>
395            </tr>
396            <tr>
397               <td class="left"></td>
398               <td class="right">P. Leach</td>
399            </tr>
400            <tr>
401               <td class="left"></td>
402               <td class="right">Microsoft</td>
403            </tr>
404            <tr>
405               <td class="left"></td>
406               <td class="right">T. Berners-Lee</td>
407            </tr>
408            <tr>
409               <td class="left"></td>
410               <td class="right">W3C/MIT</td>
411            </tr>
412            <tr>
413               <td class="left"></td>
414               <td class="right">Y. Lafon, Editor</td>
415            </tr>
416            <tr>
417               <td class="left"></td>
418               <td class="right">W3C</td>
419            </tr>
420            <tr>
421               <td class="left"></td>
422               <td class="right">J. Reschke, Editor</td>
423            </tr>
424            <tr>
425               <td class="left"></td>
426               <td class="right">greenbytes</td>
427            </tr>
428            <tr>
429               <td class="left"></td>
430               <td class="right">January 12, 2008</td>
431            </tr>
432         </tbody>
433      </table>
434      <p class="title">HTTP/1.1, part 3: Message Payload and Content Negotiation<br><span class="filename">draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-01</span></p>
435      <div id="rfc.status">
436         <h1><a href="#rfc.status">Status of this Memo</a></h1>
437         <p>By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she
438            is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section
439            6 of BCP 79.
440         </p>
441         <p>Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note
442            that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
443         </p>
444         <p>Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other
445            documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as “work
446            in progress”.
447         </p>
448         <p>The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at <a href="http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt">http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt</a>.
449         </p>
450         <p>The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at <a href="http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html">http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html</a>.
451         </p>
452         <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on July 15, 2008.</p>
453      </div>
454      <h1 id="rfc.abstract"><a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a></h1>
455      <p>The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is an application-level protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypermedia information
456         systems. HTTP has been in use by the World Wide Web global information initiative since 1990. This document is Part 3 of the
457         seven-part specification that defines the protocol referred to as "HTTP/1.1" and, taken together, obsoletes RFC 2616. Part
458         3 defines HTTP message content, metadata, and content negotiation.
459      </p>
460      <h1 id="rfc.note.1"><a href="#rfc.note.1">Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor)</a></h1>
461      <p>Discussion of this draft should take place on the HTTPBIS working group mailing list (ietf-http-wg@w3.org). The current issues
462         list is at &lt;<a href="http://www.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/11">http://www.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/11</a>&gt; and related documents (including fancy diffs) can be found at &lt;<a href="http://www.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/">http://www.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/</a>&gt;.
463      </p>
464      <p>This draft incorporates those issue resolutions that were either collected in the original RFC2616 errata list (&lt;<a href="http://purl.org/NET/http-errata">http://purl.org/NET/http-errata</a>&gt;), or which were agreed upon on the mailing list between October 2006 and November 2007 (as published in "draft-lafon-rfc2616bis-03").
465      </p>
466      <hr class="noprint">
467      <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
468      <ul class="toc">
469         <li><a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#introduction">Introduction</a><ul>
470               <li><a href="#rfc.section.1.1">1.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#intro.requirements">Requirements</a></li>
471            </ul>
472         </li>
473         <li><a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#protocol.parameters">Protocol Parameters</a><ul>
474               <li><a href="#rfc.section.2.1">2.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#character.sets">Character Sets</a><ul>
475                     <li><a href="#rfc.section.2.1.1">2.1.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#missing.charset">Missing Charset</a></li>
476                  </ul>
477               </li>
478               <li><a href="#rfc.section.2.2">2.2</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#content.codings">Content Codings</a></li>
479               <li><a href="#rfc.section.2.3">2.3</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#media.types">Media Types</a><ul>
480                     <li><a href="#rfc.section.2.3.1">2.3.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#canonicalization.and.text.defaults">Canonicalization and Text Defaults</a></li>
481                     <li><a href="#rfc.section.2.3.2">2.3.2</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#multipart.types">Multipart Types</a></li>
482                  </ul>
483               </li>
484               <li><a href="#rfc.section.2.4">2.4</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#quality.values">Quality Values</a></li>
485               <li><a href="#rfc.section.2.5">2.5</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#language.tags">Language Tags</a></li>
486            </ul>
487         </li>
488         <li><a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#entity">Entity</a><ul>
489               <li><a href="#rfc.section.3.1">3.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#entity.header.fields">Entity Header Fields</a></li>
490               <li><a href="#rfc.section.3.2">3.2</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#entity.body">Entity Body</a><ul>
491                     <li><a href="#rfc.section.3.2.1">3.2.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#type">Type</a></li>
492                     <li><a href="#rfc.section.3.2.2">3.2.2</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#entity.length">Entity Length</a></li>
493                  </ul>
494               </li>
495            </ul>
496         </li>
497         <li><a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#content.negotiation">Content Negotiation</a><ul>
498               <li><a href="#rfc.section.4.1">4.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#server-driven.negotiation">Server-driven Negotiation</a></li>
499               <li><a href="#rfc.section.4.2">4.2</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#agent-driven.negotiation">Agent-driven Negotiation</a></li>
500               <li><a href="#rfc.section.4.3">4.3</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#transparent.negotiation">Transparent Negotiation</a></li>
501            </ul>
502         </li>
503         <li><a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#header.fields">Header Field Definitions</a><ul>
504               <li><a href="#rfc.section.5.1">5.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#header.accept">Accept</a></li>
505               <li><a href="#rfc.section.5.2">5.2</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#header.accept-charset">Accept-Charset</a></li>
506               <li><a href="#rfc.section.5.3">5.3</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#header.accept-encoding">Accept-Encoding</a></li>
507               <li><a href="#rfc.section.5.4">5.4</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#header.accept-language">Accept-Language</a></li>
508               <li><a href="#rfc.section.5.5">5.5</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#header.content-encoding">Content-Encoding</a></li>
509               <li><a href="#rfc.section.5.6">5.6</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#header.content-language">Content-Language</a></li>
510               <li><a href="#rfc.section.5.7">5.7</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#header.content-location">Content-Location</a></li>
511               <li><a href="#rfc.section.5.8">5.8</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#header.content-md5">Content-MD5</a></li>
512               <li><a href="#rfc.section.5.9">5.9</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#header.content-type">Content-Type</a></li>
513            </ul>
514         </li>
515         <li><a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#IANA.considerations">IANA Considerations</a></li>
516         <li><a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#security.considerations">Security Considerations</a><ul>
517               <li><a href="#rfc.section.7.1">7.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#privacy.issues.connected.to.accept.headers">Privacy Issues Connected to Accept Headers</a></li>
518               <li><a href="#rfc.section.7.2">7.2</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#content-disposition.issues">Content-Disposition Issues</a></li>
519            </ul>
520         </li>
521         <li><a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#ack">Acknowledgments</a></li>
522         <li><a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.references">References</a><ul>
523               <li><a href="#rfc.section.9.1">9.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a></li>
524               <li><a href="#rfc.section.9.2">9.2</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a></li>
525            </ul>
526         </li>
527         <li><a href="#rfc.section.A">A.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#differences.between.http.entities.and.rfc.2045.entities">Differences Between HTTP Entities and RFC 2045 Entities</a><ul>
528               <li><a href="#rfc.section.A.1">A.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#mime-version">MIME-Version</a></li>
529               <li><a href="#rfc.section.A.2">A.2</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#conversion.to.canonical.form">Conversion to Canonical Form</a></li>
530               <li><a href="#rfc.section.A.3">A.3</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#introduction.of.content-encoding">Introduction of Content-Encoding</a></li>
531               <li><a href="#rfc.section.A.4">A.4</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#no.content-transfer-encoding">No Content-Transfer-Encoding</a></li>
532               <li><a href="#rfc.section.A.5">A.5</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#introduction.of.transfer-encoding">Introduction of Transfer-Encoding</a></li>
533               <li><a href="#rfc.section.A.6">A.6</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#mhtml.line.length">MHTML and Line Length Limitations</a></li>
534            </ul>
535         </li>
536         <li><a href="#rfc.section.B">B.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#additional.features">Additional Features</a><ul>
537               <li><a href="#rfc.section.B.1">B.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#content-disposition">Content-Disposition</a></li>
538            </ul>
539         </li>
540         <li><a href="#rfc.section.C">C.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#compatibility">Compatibility with Previous Versions</a><ul>
541               <li><a href="#rfc.section.C.1">C.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#changes.from.rfc.2068">Changes from RFC 2068</a></li>
542               <li><a href="#rfc.section.C.2">C.2</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#changes.from.rfc.2616">Changes from RFC 2616</a></li>
543            </ul>
544         </li>
545         <li><a href="#rfc.section.D">D.</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.section.D">Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)</a><ul>
546               <li><a href="#rfc.section.D.1">D.1</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.section.D.1">Since RFC2616</a></li>
547               <li><a href="#rfc.section.D.2">D.2</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.section.D.2">Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-00</a></li>
548            </ul>
549         </li>
550         <li><a href="#rfc.index">Index</a></li>
551         <li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></li>
552         <li><a href="#rfc.ipr">Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements</a></li>
553      </ul>
554      <div id="introduction">
555         <h1 id="rfc.section.1" class="np"><a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a>&nbsp;<a href="#introduction">Introduction</a></h1>
556         <p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">This document defines HTTP/1.1 message payloads (a.k.a., content), the associated metadata header fields that define how the
557            payload is intended to be interpreted by a recipient, the request header fields that may influence content selection, and
558            the various selection algorithms that are collectively referred to as HTTP content negotiation.
559         </p>
560         <p id="rfc.section.1.p.2">This document is currently disorganized in order to minimize the changes between drafts and enable reviewers to see the smaller
561            errata changes. The next draft will reorganize the sections to better reflect the content. In particular, the sections on
562            entities will be renamed payload and moved to the first half of the document, while the sections on content negotiation and
563            associated request header fields will be moved to the second half. The current mess reflects how widely dispersed these topics
564            and associated requirements had become in <a href="#RFC2616" id="rfc.xref.RFC2616.1"><cite title="Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1">[RFC2616]</cite></a>.
565         </p>
566         <div id="intro.requirements">
567            <h2 id="rfc.section.1.1"><a href="#rfc.section.1.1">1.1</a>&nbsp;<a href="#intro.requirements">Requirements</a></h2>
568            <p id="rfc.section.1.1.p.1">The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL"
569               in this document are to be interpreted as described in <a href="#RFC2119" id="rfc.xref.RFC2119.1"><cite title="Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels">[RFC2119]</cite></a>.
570            </p>
571            <p id="rfc.section.1.1.p.2">An implementation is not compliant if it fails to satisfy one or more of the <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> or <em class="bcp14">REQUIRED</em> level requirements for the protocols it implements. An implementation that satisfies all the <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> or <em class="bcp14">REQUIRED</em> level and all the <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> level requirements for its protocols is said to be "unconditionally compliant"; one that satisfies all the <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> level requirements but not all the <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> level requirements for its protocols is said to be "conditionally compliant."
572            </p>
573         </div>
574      </div>
575      <div id="protocol.parameters">
576         <h1 id="rfc.section.2"><a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a>&nbsp;<a href="#protocol.parameters">Protocol Parameters</a></h1>
577         <div id="character.sets">
578            <h2 id="rfc.section.2.1"><a href="#rfc.section.2.1">2.1</a>&nbsp;<a href="#character.sets">Character Sets</a></h2>
579            <p id="rfc.section.2.1.p.1">HTTP uses the same definition of the term "character set" as that described for MIME:</p>
580            <p id="rfc.section.2.1.p.2">The term "character set" is used in this document to refer to a method used with one or more tables to convert a sequence
581               of octets into a sequence of characters. Note that unconditional conversion in the other direction is not required, in that
582               not all characters may be available in a given character set and a character set may provide more than one sequence of octets
583               to represent a particular character. This definition is intended to allow various kinds of character encoding, from simple
584               single-table mappings such as US-ASCII to complex table switching methods such as those that use ISO-2022's techniques. However,
585               the definition associated with a MIME character set name <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> fully specify the mapping to be performed from octets to characters. In particular, use of external profiling information
586               to determine the exact mapping is not permitted.
587            </p>
588            <ul class="empty">
589               <li><b>Note:</b> This use of the term "character set" is more commonly referred to as a "character encoding." However, since HTTP and MIME
590                  share the same registry, it is important that the terminology also be shared.
591               </li>
592            </ul>
593            <p id="rfc.section.2.1.p.4">HTTP character sets are identified by case-insensitive tokens. The complete set of tokens is defined by the IANA Character
594               Set registry (&lt;<a href="http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets">http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets</a>&gt;).
595            </p>
596            <div id="rfc.figure.u.1"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.1"></span>  charset = token
597</pre><p id="rfc.section.2.1.p.6">Although HTTP allows an arbitrary token to be used as a charset value, any token that has a predefined value within the IANA
598               Character Set registry <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> represent the character set defined by that registry. Applications <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> limit their use of character sets to those defined by the IANA registry.
599            </p>
600            <p id="rfc.section.2.1.p.7">HTTP uses charset in two contexts: within an Accept-Charset request header (in which the charset value is an unquoted token)
601               and as the value of a parameter in a Content-Type header (within a request or response), in which case the parameter value
602               of the charset parameter may be quoted.
603            </p>
604            <p id="rfc.section.2.1.p.8">Implementors should be aware of IETF character set requirements <a href="#RFC3629" id="rfc.xref.RFC3629.1"><cite title="UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646">[RFC3629]</cite></a> <a href="#RFC2277" id="rfc.xref.RFC2277.1"><cite title="IETF Policy on Character Sets and Languages">[RFC2277]</cite></a>.
605            </p>
606            <div id="missing.charset">
607               <h3 id="rfc.section.2.1.1"><a href="#rfc.section.2.1.1">2.1.1</a>&nbsp;<a href="#missing.charset">Missing Charset</a></h3>
608               <p id="rfc.section.2.1.1.p.1">Some HTTP/1.0 software has interpreted a Content-Type header without charset parameter incorrectly to mean "recipient should
609                  guess." Senders wishing to defeat this behavior <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> include a charset parameter even when the charset is ISO-8859-1 (<a href="#ISO-8859-1" id="rfc.xref.ISO-8859-1.1"><cite title="Information technology -- 8-bit single-byte coded graphic character sets -- Part 1: Latin alphabet No. 1">[ISO-8859-1]</cite></a>) and <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> do so when it is known that it will not confuse the recipient.
610               </p>
611               <p id="rfc.section.2.1.1.p.2">Unfortunately, some older HTTP/1.0 clients did not deal properly with an explicit charset parameter. HTTP/1.1 recipients <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> respect the charset label provided by the sender; and those user agents that have a provision to "guess" a charset <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> use the charset from the content-type field if they support that charset, rather than the recipient's preference, when initially
612                  displaying a document. See <a href="#canonicalization.and.text.defaults" title="Canonicalization and Text Defaults">Section&nbsp;2.3.1</a>.
613               </p>
614            </div>
615         </div>
616         <div id="content.codings">
617            <h2 id="rfc.section.2.2"><a href="#rfc.section.2.2">2.2</a>&nbsp;<a href="#content.codings">Content Codings</a></h2>
618            <p id="rfc.section.2.2.p.1">Content coding values indicate an encoding transformation that has been or can be applied to an entity. Content codings are
619               primarily used to allow a document to be compressed or otherwise usefully transformed without losing the identity of its underlying
620               media type and without loss of information. Frequently, the entity is stored in coded form, transmitted directly, and only
621               decoded by the recipient.
622            </p>
623            <div id="rfc.figure.u.2"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.2"></span>  content-coding   = token
624</pre><p id="rfc.section.2.2.p.3">All content-coding values are case-insensitive. HTTP/1.1 uses content-coding values in the Accept-Encoding (<a href="#header.accept-encoding" id="rfc.xref.header.accept-encoding.1" title="Accept-Encoding">Section&nbsp;5.3</a>) and Content-Encoding (<a href="#header.content-encoding" id="rfc.xref.header.content-encoding.1" title="Content-Encoding">Section&nbsp;5.5</a>) header fields. Although the value describes the content-coding, what is more important is that it indicates what decoding
625               mechanism will be required to remove the encoding.
626            </p>
627            <p id="rfc.section.2.2.p.4">The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) acts as a registry for content-coding value tokens. Initially, the registry
628               contains the following tokens:
629            </p>
630            <p id="rfc.section.2.2.p.5">gzip<span id="rfc.iref.g.3"></span>
631            </p>
632            <ul class="empty">
633               <li>An encoding format produced by the file compression program "gzip" (GNU zip) as described in <a href="#RFC1952" id="rfc.xref.RFC1952.1"><cite title="GZIP file format specification version 4.3">[RFC1952]</cite></a>. This format is a Lempel-Ziv coding (LZ77) with a 32 bit CRC.
634               </li>
635            </ul>
636            <p id="rfc.section.2.2.p.6">compress<span id="rfc.iref.c.1"></span>
637            </p>
638            <ul class="empty">
639               <li>The encoding format produced by the common UNIX file compression program "compress". This format is an adaptive Lempel-Ziv-Welch
640                  coding (LZW).
641               </li>
642               <li>Use of program names for the identification of encoding formats is not desirable and is discouraged for future encodings.
643                  Their use here is representative of historical practice, not good design. For compatibility with previous implementations
644                  of HTTP, applications <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> consider "x-gzip" and "x-compress" to be equivalent to "gzip" and "compress" respectively.
645               </li>
646            </ul>
647            <p id="rfc.section.2.2.p.7">deflate<span id="rfc.iref.d.1"></span>
648            </p>
649            <ul class="empty">
650               <li>The "zlib" format defined in <a href="#RFC1950" id="rfc.xref.RFC1950.1"><cite title="ZLIB Compressed Data Format Specification version 3.3">[RFC1950]</cite></a> in combination with the "deflate" compression mechanism described in <a href="#RFC1951" id="rfc.xref.RFC1951.1"><cite title="DEFLATE Compressed Data Format Specification version 1.3">[RFC1951]</cite></a>.
651               </li>
652            </ul>
653            <p id="rfc.section.2.2.p.8">identity<span id="rfc.iref.i.1"></span>
654            </p>
655            <ul class="empty">
656               <li>The default (identity) encoding; the use of no transformation whatsoever. This content-coding is used only in the Accept-Encoding
657                  header, and <em class="bcp14">SHOULD NOT</em> be used in the Content-Encoding header.
658               </li>
659            </ul>
660            <p id="rfc.section.2.2.p.9">New content-coding value tokens <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> be registered; to allow interoperability between clients and servers, specifications of the content coding algorithms needed
661               to implement a new value <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> be publicly available and adequate for independent implementation, and conform to the purpose of content coding defined in
662               this section.
663            </p>
664         </div>
665         <div id="media.types">
666            <h2 id="rfc.section.2.3"><a href="#rfc.section.2.3">2.3</a>&nbsp;<a href="#media.types">Media Types</a></h2>
667            <p id="rfc.section.2.3.p.1">HTTP uses Internet Media Types <a href="#RFC2046" id="rfc.xref.RFC2046.1"><cite title="Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types">[RFC2046]</cite></a> in the Content-Type (<a href="#header.content-type" id="rfc.xref.header.content-type.1" title="Content-Type">Section&nbsp;5.9</a>) and Accept (<a href="#header.accept" id="rfc.xref.header.accept.1" title="Accept">Section&nbsp;5.1</a>) header fields in order to provide open and extensible data typing and type negotiation.
668            </p>
669            <div id="rfc.figure.u.3"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.4"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.5"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.6"></span>  media-type     = type "/" subtype *( ";" parameter )
670  type           = token
671  subtype        = token
672</pre><p id="rfc.section.2.3.p.3">Parameters <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> follow the type/subtype in the form of attribute/value pairs.
673            </p>
674            <div id="rfc.figure.u.4"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.7"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.8"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.9"></span>  parameter               = attribute "=" value
675  attribute               = token
676  value                   = token | quoted-string
677</pre><p id="rfc.section.2.3.p.5">The type, subtype, and parameter attribute names are case-insensitive. Parameter values might or might not be case-sensitive,
678               depending on the semantics of the parameter name. Linear white space (LWS) <em class="bcp14">MUST NOT</em> be used between the type and subtype, nor between an attribute and its value. The presence or absence of a parameter might
679               be significant to the processing of a media-type, depending on its definition within the media type registry.
680            </p>
681            <p id="rfc.section.2.3.p.6">Note that some older HTTP applications do not recognize media type parameters. When sending data to older HTTP applications,
682               implementations <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> only use media type parameters when they are required by that type/subtype definition.
683            </p>
684            <p id="rfc.section.2.3.p.7">Media-type values are registered with the Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA). The media type registration process is
685               outlined in <a href="#RFC4288" id="rfc.xref.RFC4288.1"><cite title="Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures">[RFC4288]</cite></a>. Use of non-registered media types is discouraged.
686            </p>
687            <div id="canonicalization.and.text.defaults">
688               <h3 id="rfc.section.2.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.2.3.1">2.3.1</a>&nbsp;<a href="#canonicalization.and.text.defaults">Canonicalization and Text Defaults</a></h3>
689               <p id="rfc.section.2.3.1.p.1">Internet media types are registered with a canonical form. An entity-body transferred via HTTP messages <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> be represented in the appropriate canonical form prior to its transmission except for "text" types, as defined in the next
690                  paragraph.
691               </p>
692               <p id="rfc.section.2.3.1.p.2">When in canonical form, media subtypes of the "text" type use CRLF as the text line break. HTTP relaxes this requirement and
693                  allows the transport of text media with plain CR or LF alone representing a line break when it is done consistently for an
694                  entire entity-body. HTTP applications <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> accept CRLF, bare CR, and bare LF as being representative of a line break in text media received via HTTP. In addition, if
695                  the text is represented in a character set that does not use octets 13 and 10 for CR and LF respectively, as is the case for
696                  some multi-byte character sets, HTTP allows the use of whatever octet sequences are defined by that character set to represent
697                  the equivalent of CR and LF for line breaks. This flexibility regarding line breaks applies only to text media in the entity-body;
698                  a bare CR or LF <em class="bcp14">MUST NOT</em> be substituted for CRLF within any of the HTTP control structures (such as header fields and multipart boundaries).
699               </p>
700               <p id="rfc.section.2.3.1.p.3">If an entity-body is encoded with a content-coding, the underlying data <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> be in a form defined above prior to being encoded.
701               </p>
702               <p id="rfc.section.2.3.1.p.4">The "charset" parameter is used with some media types to define the character set (<a href="#character.sets" title="Character Sets">Section&nbsp;2.1</a>) of the data. When no explicit charset parameter is provided by the sender, media subtypes of the "text" type are defined
703                  to have a default charset value of "ISO-8859-1" when received via HTTP. Data in character sets other than "ISO-8859-1" or
704                  its subsets <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> be labeled with an appropriate charset value. See <a href="#missing.charset" title="Missing Charset">Section&nbsp;2.1.1</a> for compatibility problems.
705               </p>
706            </div>
707            <div id="multipart.types">
708               <h3 id="rfc.section.2.3.2"><a href="#rfc.section.2.3.2">2.3.2</a>&nbsp;<a href="#multipart.types">Multipart Types</a></h3>
709               <p id="rfc.section.2.3.2.p.1">MIME provides for a number of "multipart" types -- encapsulations of one or more entities within a single message-body. All
710                  multipart types share a common syntax, as defined in <a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2046#section-5.1.1">Section 5.1.1</a> of <a href="#RFC2046" id="rfc.xref.RFC2046.2"><cite title="Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types">[RFC2046]</cite></a>, and <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> include a boundary parameter as part of the media type value. The message body is itself a protocol element and <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> therefore use only CRLF to represent line breaks between body-parts. Unlike in RFC 2046, the epilogue of any multipart message <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> be empty; HTTP applications <em class="bcp14">MUST NOT</em> transmit the epilogue (even if the original multipart contains an epilogue). These restrictions exist in order to preserve
711                  the self-delimiting nature of a multipart message-body, wherein the "end" of the message-body is indicated by the ending multipart
712                  boundary.
713               </p>
714               <p id="rfc.section.2.3.2.p.2">In general, HTTP treats a multipart message-body no differently than any other media type: strictly as payload. The one exception
715                  is the "multipart/byteranges" type (<a href="p5-range.html#internet.media.type.multipart.byteranges" title="Internet Media Type multipart/byteranges">Appendix A</a> of <a href="#Part5" id="rfc.xref.Part5.1"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 5: Range Requests and Partial Responses">[Part5]</cite></a>) when it appears in a 206 (Partial Content) response.  In all other cases, an HTTP user agent <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> follow the same or similar behavior as a MIME user agent would upon receipt of a multipart type. The MIME header fields within
716                  each body-part of a multipart message-body do not have any significance to HTTP beyond that defined by their MIME semantics.
717               </p>
718               <p id="rfc.section.2.3.2.p.3">In general, an HTTP user agent <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> follow the same or similar behavior as a MIME user agent would upon receipt of a multipart type. If an application receives
719                  an unrecognized multipart subtype, the application <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> treat it as being equivalent to "multipart/mixed".
720               </p>
721               <ul class="empty">
722                  <li><b>Note:</b> The "multipart/form-data" type has been specifically defined for carrying form data suitable for processing via the POST request
723                     method, as described in <a href="#RFC2388" id="rfc.xref.RFC2388.1"><cite title="Returning Values from Forms: multipart/form-data">[RFC2388]</cite></a>.
724                  </li>
725               </ul>
726            </div>
727         </div>
728         <div id="quality.values">
729            <h2 id="rfc.section.2.4"><a href="#rfc.section.2.4">2.4</a>&nbsp;<a href="#quality.values">Quality Values</a></h2>
730            <p id="rfc.section.2.4.p.1">HTTP content negotiation (<a href="#content.negotiation" title="Content Negotiation">Section&nbsp;4</a>) uses short "floating point" numbers to indicate the relative importance ("weight") of various negotiable parameters. A weight
731               is normalized to a real number in the range 0 through 1, where 0 is the minimum and 1 the maximum value. If a parameter has
732               a quality value of 0, then content with this parameter is `not acceptable' for the client. HTTP/1.1 applications <em class="bcp14">MUST NOT</em> generate more than three digits after the decimal point. User configuration of these values <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> also be limited in this fashion.
733            </p>
734            <div id="rfc.figure.u.5"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.10"></span>  qvalue         = ( "0" [ "." 0*3DIGIT ] )
735                 | ( "1" [ "." 0*3("0") ] )
736</pre><p id="rfc.section.2.4.p.3">"Quality values" is a misnomer, since these values merely represent relative degradation in desired quality.</p>
737         </div>
738         <div id="language.tags">
739            <h2 id="rfc.section.2.5"><a href="#rfc.section.2.5">2.5</a>&nbsp;<a href="#language.tags">Language Tags</a></h2>
740            <p id="rfc.section.2.5.p.1">A language tag identifies a natural language spoken, written, or otherwise conveyed by human beings for communication of information
741               to other human beings. Computer languages are explicitly excluded. HTTP uses language tags within the Accept-Language and
742               Content-Language fields.
743            </p>
744            <p id="rfc.section.2.5.p.2">The syntax and registry of HTTP language tags is the same as that defined by <a href="#RFC1766" id="rfc.xref.RFC1766.1"><cite title="Tags for the Identification of Languages">[RFC1766]</cite></a>. In summary, a language tag is composed of 1 or more parts: A primary language tag and a possibly empty series of subtags:
745            </p>
746            <div id="rfc.figure.u.6"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.11"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.12"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.13"></span>  language-tag  = primary-tag *( "-" subtag )
747  primary-tag   = 1*8ALPHA
748  subtag        = 1*8ALPHA
749</pre><p id="rfc.section.2.5.p.4">White space is not allowed within the tag and all tags are case-insensitive. The name space of language tags is administered
750               by the IANA. Example tags include:
751            </p>
752            <div id="rfc.figure.u.7"></div><pre class="text">    en, en-US, en-cockney, i-cherokee, x-pig-latin
753</pre><p id="rfc.section.2.5.p.6">where any two-letter primary-tag is an ISO-639 language abbreviation and any two-letter initial subtag is an ISO-3166 country
754               code. (The last three tags above are not registered tags; all but the last are examples of tags which could be registered
755               in future.)
756            </p>
757         </div>
758      </div>
759      <div id="entity">
760         <h1 id="rfc.section.3"><a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a>&nbsp;<a href="#entity">Entity</a></h1>
761         <p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">Request and Response messages <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> transfer an entity if not otherwise restricted by the request method or response status code. An entity consists of entity-header
762            fields and an entity-body, although some responses will only include the entity-headers.
763         </p>
764         <p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">In this section, both sender and recipient refer to either the client or the server, depending on who sends and who receives
765            the entity.
766         </p>
767         <div id="entity.header.fields">
768            <h2 id="rfc.section.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.3.1">3.1</a>&nbsp;<a href="#entity.header.fields">Entity Header Fields</a></h2>
769            <p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.1">Entity-header fields define metainformation about the entity-body or, if no body is present, about the resource identified
770               by the request.
771            </p>
772            <div id="rfc.figure.u.8"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.14"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.15"></span>  entity-header  = Allow                    ; <a href="#Part2" id="rfc.xref.Part2.1"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 2: Message Semantics">[Part2]</cite></a>, <a href="p2-semantics.html#header.allow" title="Allow">Section 10.1</a>
773                 | Content-Encoding         ; <a href="#header.content-encoding" id="rfc.xref.header.content-encoding.2" title="Content-Encoding">Section&nbsp;5.5</a>
774                 | Content-Language         ; <a href="#header.content-language" id="rfc.xref.header.content-language.1" title="Content-Language">Section&nbsp;5.6</a>
775                 | Content-Length           ; <a href="#Part1" id="rfc.xref.Part1.1"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 1: URIs, Connections, and Message Parsing">[Part1]</cite></a>, <a href="p1-messaging.html#header.content-length" title="Content-Length">Section 8.2</a>
776                 | Content-Location         ; <a href="#header.content-location" id="rfc.xref.header.content-location.1" title="Content-Location">Section&nbsp;5.7</a>
777                 | Content-MD5              ; <a href="#header.content-md5" id="rfc.xref.header.content-md5.1" title="Content-MD5">Section&nbsp;5.8</a>
778                 | Content-Range            ; <a href="#Part5" id="rfc.xref.Part5.2"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 5: Range Requests and Partial Responses">[Part5]</cite></a>, <a href="p5-range.html#header.content-range" title="Content-Range">Section 5.2</a>
779                 | Content-Type             ; <a href="#header.content-type" id="rfc.xref.header.content-type.2" title="Content-Type">Section&nbsp;5.9</a>
780                 | Expires                  ; <a href="#Part6" id="rfc.xref.Part6.1"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 6: Caching">[Part6]</cite></a>, <a href="p6-cache.html#header.expires" title="Expires">Section 15.3</a>
781                 | Last-Modified            ; <a href="#Part4" id="rfc.xref.Part4.1"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 4: Conditional Requests">[Part4]</cite></a>, <a href="p4-conditional.html#header.last-modified" title="Last-Modified">Section 6.6</a>
782                 | extension-header
783 
784  extension-header = message-header
785</pre><p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.3">The extension-header mechanism allows additional entity-header fields to be defined without changing the protocol, but these
786               fields cannot be assumed to be recognizable by the recipient. Unrecognized header fields <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> be ignored by the recipient and <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> be forwarded by transparent proxies.
787            </p>
788         </div>
789         <div id="entity.body">
790            <h2 id="rfc.section.3.2"><a href="#rfc.section.3.2">3.2</a>&nbsp;<a href="#entity.body">Entity Body</a></h2>
791            <p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.1">The entity-body (if any) sent with an HTTP request or response is in a format and encoding defined by the entity-header fields.</p>
792            <div id="rfc.figure.u.9"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.16"></span>  entity-body    = *OCTET
793</pre><p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.3">An entity-body is only present in a message when a message-body is present, as described in <a href="p1-messaging.html#message.body" title="Message Body">Section 4.3</a> of <a href="#Part1" id="rfc.xref.Part1.2"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 1: URIs, Connections, and Message Parsing">[Part1]</cite></a>. The entity-body is obtained from the message-body by decoding any Transfer-Encoding that might have been applied to ensure
794               safe and proper transfer of the message.
795            </p>
796            <div id="type">
797               <h3 id="rfc.section.3.2.1"><a href="#rfc.section.3.2.1">3.2.1</a>&nbsp;<a href="#type">Type</a></h3>
798               <p id="rfc.section.3.2.1.p.1">When an entity-body is included with a message, the data type of that body is determined via the header fields Content-Type
799                  and Content-Encoding. These define a two-layer, ordered encoding model:
800               </p>
801               <div id="rfc.figure.u.10"></div><pre class="text">    entity-body := Content-Encoding( Content-Type( data ) )
802</pre><p id="rfc.section.3.2.1.p.3">Content-Type specifies the media type of the underlying data. Content-Encoding may be used to indicate any additional content
803                  codings applied to the data, usually for the purpose of data compression, that are a property of the requested resource. There
804                  is no default encoding.
805               </p>
806               <p id="rfc.section.3.2.1.p.4">Any HTTP/1.1 message containing an entity-body <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> include a Content-Type header field defining the media type of that body. If and only if the media type is not given by a
807                  Content-Type field, the recipient <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> attempt to guess the media type via inspection of its content and/or the name extension(s) of the URI used to identify the
808                  resource. If the media type remains unknown, the recipient <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> treat it as type "application/octet-stream".
809               </p>
810            </div>
811            <div id="entity.length">
812               <h3 id="rfc.section.3.2.2"><a href="#rfc.section.3.2.2">3.2.2</a>&nbsp;<a href="#entity.length">Entity Length</a></h3>
813               <p id="rfc.section.3.2.2.p.1">The entity-length of a message is the length of the message-body before any transfer-codings have been applied. <a href="p1-messaging.html#message.length" title="Message Length">Section 4.4</a> of <a href="#Part1" id="rfc.xref.Part1.3"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 1: URIs, Connections, and Message Parsing">[Part1]</cite></a> defines how the transfer-length of a message-body is determined.
814               </p>
815            </div>
816         </div>
817      </div>
818      <div id="content.negotiation">
819         <h1 id="rfc.section.4"><a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a>&nbsp;<a href="#content.negotiation">Content Negotiation</a></h1>
820         <p id="rfc.section.4.p.1">Most HTTP responses include an entity which contains information for interpretation by a human user. Naturally, it is desirable
821            to supply the user with the "best available" entity corresponding to the request. Unfortunately for servers and caches, not
822            all users have the same preferences for what is "best," and not all user agents are equally capable of rendering all entity
823            types. For that reason, HTTP has provisions for several mechanisms for "content negotiation" -- the process of selecting the
824            best representation for a given response when there are multiple representations available.
825         </p>
826         <ul class="empty">
827            <li><b>Note:</b> This is not called "format negotiation" because the alternate representations may be of the same media type, but use different
828               capabilities of that type, be in different languages, etc.
829            </li>
830         </ul>
831         <p id="rfc.section.4.p.2">Any response containing an entity-body <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> be subject to negotiation, including error responses.
832         </p>
833         <p id="rfc.section.4.p.3">There are two kinds of content negotiation which are possible in HTTP: server-driven and agent-driven negotiation. These two
834            kinds of negotiation are orthogonal and thus may be used separately or in combination. One method of combination, referred
835            to as transparent negotiation, occurs when a cache uses the agent-driven negotiation information provided by the origin server
836            in order to provide server-driven negotiation for subsequent requests.
837         </p>
838         <div id="server-driven.negotiation">
839            <h2 id="rfc.section.4.1"><a href="#rfc.section.4.1">4.1</a>&nbsp;<a href="#server-driven.negotiation">Server-driven Negotiation</a></h2>
840            <p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.1">If the selection of the best representation for a response is made by an algorithm located at the server, it is called server-driven
841               negotiation. Selection is based on the available representations of the response (the dimensions over which it can vary; e.g.
842               language, content-coding, etc.) and the contents of particular header fields in the request message or on other information
843               pertaining to the request (such as the network address of the client).
844            </p>
845            <p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.2">Server-driven negotiation is advantageous when the algorithm for selecting from among the available representations is difficult
846               to describe to the user agent, or when the server desires to send its "best guess" to the client along with the first response
847               (hoping to avoid the round-trip delay of a subsequent request if the "best guess" is good enough for the user). In order to
848               improve the server's guess, the user agent <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> include request header fields (Accept, Accept-Language, Accept-Encoding, etc.) which describe its preferences for such a response.
849            </p>
850            <p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.3">Server-driven negotiation has disadvantages: </p>
851            <ol>
852               <li>It is impossible for the server to accurately determine what might be "best" for any given user, since that would require
853                  complete knowledge of both the capabilities of the user agent and the intended use for the response (e.g., does the user want
854                  to view it on screen or print it on paper?).
855               </li>
856               <li>Having the user agent describe its capabilities in every request can be both very inefficient (given that only a small percentage
857                  of responses have multiple representations) and a potential violation of the user's privacy.
858               </li>
859               <li>It complicates the implementation of an origin server and the algorithms for generating responses to a request.</li>
860               <li>It may limit a public cache's ability to use the same response for multiple user's requests.</li>
861            </ol>
862            <p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.4">HTTP/1.1 includes the following request-header fields for enabling server-driven negotiation through description of user agent
863               capabilities and user preferences: Accept (<a href="#header.accept" id="rfc.xref.header.accept.2" title="Accept">Section&nbsp;5.1</a>), Accept-Charset (<a href="#header.accept-charset" id="rfc.xref.header.accept-charset.1" title="Accept-Charset">Section&nbsp;5.2</a>), Accept-Encoding (<a href="#header.accept-encoding" id="rfc.xref.header.accept-encoding.2" title="Accept-Encoding">Section&nbsp;5.3</a>), Accept-Language (<a href="#header.accept-language" id="rfc.xref.header.accept-language.1" title="Accept-Language">Section&nbsp;5.4</a>), and User-Agent (<a href="p2-semantics.html#header.user-agent" title="User-Agent">Section 10.9</a> of <a href="#Part2" id="rfc.xref.Part2.2"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 2: Message Semantics">[Part2]</cite></a>). However, an origin server is not limited to these dimensions and <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> vary the response based on any aspect of the request, including information outside the request-header fields or within extension
864               header fields not defined by this specification.
865            </p>
866            <p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.5">The Vary header field (<a href="p6-cache.html#header.vary" title="Vary">Section 15.5</a> of <a href="#Part6" id="rfc.xref.Part6.2"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 6: Caching">[Part6]</cite></a>) can be used to express the parameters the server uses to select a representation that is subject to server-driven negotiation.
867            </p>
868         </div>
869         <div id="agent-driven.negotiation">
870            <h2 id="rfc.section.4.2"><a href="#rfc.section.4.2">4.2</a>&nbsp;<a href="#agent-driven.negotiation">Agent-driven Negotiation</a></h2>
871            <p id="rfc.section.4.2.p.1">With agent-driven negotiation, selection of the best representation for a response is performed by the user agent after receiving
872               an initial response from the origin server. Selection is based on a list of the available representations of the response
873               included within the header fields or entity-body of the initial response, with each representation identified by its own URI.
874               Selection from among the representations may be performed automatically (if the user agent is capable of doing so) or manually
875               by the user selecting from a generated (possibly hypertext) menu.
876            </p>
877            <p id="rfc.section.4.2.p.2">Agent-driven negotiation is advantageous when the response would vary over commonly-used dimensions (such as type, language,
878               or encoding), when the origin server is unable to determine a user agent's capabilities from examining the request, and generally
879               when public caches are used to distribute server load and reduce network usage.
880            </p>
881            <p id="rfc.section.4.2.p.3">Agent-driven negotiation suffers from the disadvantage of needing a second request to obtain the best alternate representation.
882               This second request is only efficient when caching is used. In addition, this specification does not define any mechanism
883               for supporting automatic selection, though it also does not prevent any such mechanism from being developed as an extension
884               and used within HTTP/1.1.
885            </p>
886            <p id="rfc.section.4.2.p.4">HTTP/1.1 defines the 300 (Multiple Choices) and 406 (Not Acceptable) status codes for enabling agent-driven negotiation when
887               the server is unwilling or unable to provide a varying response using server-driven negotiation.
888            </p>
889         </div>
890         <div id="transparent.negotiation">
891            <h2 id="rfc.section.4.3"><a href="#rfc.section.4.3">4.3</a>&nbsp;<a href="#transparent.negotiation">Transparent Negotiation</a></h2>
892            <p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.1">Transparent negotiation is a combination of both server-driven and agent-driven negotiation. When a cache is supplied with
893               a form of the list of available representations of the response (as in agent-driven negotiation) and the dimensions of variance
894               are completely understood by the cache, then the cache becomes capable of performing server-driven negotiation on behalf of
895               the origin server for subsequent requests on that resource.
896            </p>
897            <p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.2">Transparent negotiation has the advantage of distributing the negotiation work that would otherwise be required of the origin
898               server and also removing the second request delay of agent-driven negotiation when the cache is able to correctly guess the
899               right response.
900            </p>
901            <p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.3">This specification does not define any mechanism for transparent negotiation, though it also does not prevent any such mechanism
902               from being developed as an extension that could be used within HTTP/1.1.
903            </p>
904         </div>
905      </div>
906      <div id="header.fields">
907         <h1 id="rfc.section.5"><a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a>&nbsp;<a href="#header.fields">Header Field Definitions</a></h1>
908         <p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">This section defines the syntax and semantics of HTTP/1.1 header fields related to the payload of messages.</p>
909         <p id="rfc.section.5.p.2">For entity-header fields, both sender and recipient refer to either the client or the server, depending on who sends and who
910            receives the entity.
911         </p>
912         <div id="header.accept">
913            <div id="rfc.iref.a.1"></div>
914            <div id="rfc.iref.h.1"></div>
915            <h2 id="rfc.section.5.1"><a href="#rfc.section.5.1">5.1</a>&nbsp;<a href="#header.accept">Accept</a></h2>
916            <p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.1">The Accept request-header field can be used to specify certain media types which are acceptable for the response. Accept headers
917               can be used to indicate that the request is specifically limited to a small set of desired types, as in the case of a request
918               for an in-line image.
919            </p>
920            <div id="rfc.figure.u.11"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.17"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.18"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.19"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.20"></span>  Accept         = "Accept" ":"
921                   #( media-range [ accept-params ] )
922 
923  media-range    = ( "*/*"
924                   | ( type "/" "*" )
925                   | ( type "/" subtype )
926                   ) *( ";" parameter )
927  accept-params  = ";" "q" "=" qvalue *( accept-extension )
928  accept-extension = ";" token [ "=" ( token | quoted-string ) ]
929</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.3">The asterisk "*" character is used to group media types into ranges, with "*/*" indicating all media types and "type/*" indicating
930               all subtypes of that type. The media-range <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> include media type parameters that are applicable to that range.
931            </p>
932            <p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.4">Each media-range <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> be followed by one or more accept-params, beginning with the "q" parameter for indicating a relative quality factor. The first
933               "q" parameter (if any) separates the media-range parameter(s) from the accept-params. Quality factors allow the user or user
934               agent to indicate the relative degree of preference for that media-range, using the qvalue scale from 0 to 1 (<a href="#quality.values" title="Quality Values">Section&nbsp;2.4</a>). The default value is q=1.
935            </p>
936            <ul class="empty">
937               <li><b>Note:</b> Use of the "q" parameter name to separate media type parameters from Accept extension parameters is due to historical practice.
938                  Although this prevents any media type parameter named "q" from being used with a media range, such an event is believed to
939                  be unlikely given the lack of any "q" parameters in the IANA media type registry and the rare usage of any media type parameters
940                  in Accept. Future media types are discouraged from registering any parameter named "q".
941               </li>
942            </ul>
943            <p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.5">The example</p>
944            <div id="rfc.figure.u.12"></div><pre class="text">    Accept: audio/*; q=0.2, audio/basic
945</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.7"><em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> be interpreted as "I prefer audio/basic, but send me any audio type if it is the best available after an 80% mark-down in
946               quality."
947            </p>
948            <p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.8">If no Accept header field is present, then it is assumed that the client accepts all media types. If an Accept header field
949               is present, and if the server cannot send a response which is acceptable according to the combined Accept field value, then
950               the server <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> send a 406 (Not Acceptable) response.
951            </p>
952            <p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.9">A more elaborate example is</p>
953            <div id="rfc.figure.u.13"></div><pre class="text">    Accept: text/plain; q=0.5, text/html,
954            text/x-dvi; q=0.8, text/x-c
955</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.11">Verbally, this would be interpreted as "text/html and text/x-c are the preferred media types, but if they do not exist, then
956               send the text/x-dvi entity, and if that does not exist, send the text/plain entity."
957            </p>
958            <p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.12">Media ranges can be overridden by more specific media ranges or specific media types. If more than one media range applies
959               to a given type, the most specific reference has precedence. For example,
960            </p>
961            <div id="rfc.figure.u.14"></div><pre class="text">    Accept: text/*, text/html, text/html;level=1, */*
962</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.14">have the following precedence:</p>
963            <div id="rfc.figure.u.15"></div><pre class="text">    1) text/html;level=1
964    2) text/html
965    3) text/*
966    4) */*
967</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.16">The media type quality factor associated with a given type is determined by finding the media range with the highest precedence
968               which matches that type. For example,
969            </p>
970            <div id="rfc.figure.u.16"></div><pre class="text">    Accept: text/*;q=0.3, text/html;q=0.7, text/html;level=1,
971            text/html;level=2;q=0.4, */*;q=0.5
972</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.18">would cause the following values to be associated:</p>
973            <div id="rfc.figure.u.17"></div><pre class="text">    text/html;level=1         = 1
974    text/html                 = 0.7
975    text/plain                = 0.3
976    image/jpeg                = 0.5
977    text/html;level=2         = 0.4
978    text/html;level=3         = 0.7
979</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.20"><b>Note:</b> A user agent might be provided with a default set of quality values for certain media ranges. However, unless the user agent
980               is a closed system which cannot interact with other rendering agents, this default set ought to be configurable by the user.
981            </p>
982         </div>
983         <div id="header.accept-charset">
984            <div id="rfc.iref.a.2"></div>
985            <div id="rfc.iref.h.2"></div>
986            <h2 id="rfc.section.5.2"><a href="#rfc.section.5.2">5.2</a>&nbsp;<a href="#header.accept-charset">Accept-Charset</a></h2>
987            <p id="rfc.section.5.2.p.1">The Accept-Charset request-header field can be used to indicate what character sets are acceptable for the response. This
988               field allows clients capable of understanding more comprehensive or special-purpose character sets to signal that capability
989               to a server which is capable of representing documents in those character sets.
990            </p>
991            <div id="rfc.figure.u.18"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.21"></span>  Accept-Charset = "Accept-Charset" ":"
992          1#( ( charset | "*" ) [ ";" "q" "=" qvalue ] )
993</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.2.p.3">Character set values are described in <a href="#character.sets" title="Character Sets">Section&nbsp;2.1</a>. Each charset <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> be given an associated quality value which represents the user's preference for that charset. The default value is q=1. An
994               example is
995            </p>
996            <div id="rfc.figure.u.19"></div><pre class="text">   Accept-Charset: iso-8859-5, unicode-1-1;q=0.8
997</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.2.p.5">The special value "*", if present in the Accept-Charset field, matches every character set (including ISO-8859-1) which is
998               not mentioned elsewhere in the Accept-Charset field. If no "*" is present in an Accept-Charset field, then all character sets
999               not explicitly mentioned get a quality value of 0, except for ISO-8859-1, which gets a quality value of 1 if not explicitly
1000               mentioned.
1001            </p>
1002            <p id="rfc.section.5.2.p.6">If no Accept-Charset header is present, the default is that any character set is acceptable. If an Accept-Charset header is
1003               present, and if the server cannot send a response which is acceptable according to the Accept-Charset header, then the server <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> send an error response with the 406 (Not Acceptable) status code, though the sending of an unacceptable response is also allowed.
1004            </p>
1005         </div>
1006         <div id="header.accept-encoding">
1007            <div id="rfc.iref.a.3"></div>
1008            <div id="rfc.iref.h.3"></div>
1009            <h2 id="rfc.section.5.3"><a href="#rfc.section.5.3">5.3</a>&nbsp;<a href="#header.accept-encoding">Accept-Encoding</a></h2>
1010            <p id="rfc.section.5.3.p.1">The Accept-Encoding request-header field is similar to Accept, but restricts the content-codings (<a href="#content.codings" title="Content Codings">Section&nbsp;2.2</a>) that are acceptable in the response.
1011            </p>
1012            <div id="rfc.figure.u.20"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.22"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.23"></span>  Accept-Encoding  = "Accept-Encoding" ":"
1013                     #( codings [ ";" "q" "=" qvalue ] )
1014  codings          = ( content-coding | "*" )
1015</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.3.p.3">Examples of its use are:</p>
1016            <div id="rfc.figure.u.21"></div><pre class="text">    Accept-Encoding: compress, gzip
1017    Accept-Encoding:
1018    Accept-Encoding: *
1019    Accept-Encoding: compress;q=0.5, gzip;q=1.0
1020    Accept-Encoding: gzip;q=1.0, identity; q=0.5, *;q=0
1021</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.3.p.5">A server tests whether a content-coding is acceptable, according to an Accept-Encoding field, using these rules: </p>
1022            <ol>
1023               <li>If the content-coding is one of the content-codings listed in the Accept-Encoding field, then it is acceptable, unless it
1024                  is accompanied by a qvalue of 0. (As defined in <a href="#quality.values" title="Quality Values">Section&nbsp;2.4</a>, a qvalue of 0 means "not acceptable.")
1025               </li>
1026               <li>The special "*" symbol in an Accept-Encoding field matches any available content-coding not explicitly listed in the header
1027                  field.
1028               </li>
1029               <li>If multiple content-codings are acceptable, then the acceptable content-coding with the highest non-zero qvalue is preferred.</li>
1030               <li>The "identity" content-coding is always acceptable, unless specifically refused because the Accept-Encoding field includes
1031                  "identity;q=0", or because the field includes "*;q=0" and does not explicitly include the "identity" content-coding. If the
1032                  Accept-Encoding field-value is empty, then only the "identity" encoding is acceptable.
1033               </li>
1034            </ol>
1035            <p id="rfc.section.5.3.p.6">If an Accept-Encoding field is present in a request, and if the server cannot send a response which is acceptable according
1036               to the Accept-Encoding header, then the server <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> send an error response with the 406 (Not Acceptable) status code.
1037            </p>
1038            <p id="rfc.section.5.3.p.7">If no Accept-Encoding field is present in a request, the server <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> assume that the client will accept any content coding. In this case, if "identity" is one of the available content-codings,
1039               then the server <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> use the "identity" content-coding, unless it has additional information that a different content-coding is meaningful to the
1040               client.
1041            </p>
1042            <ul class="empty">
1043               <li><b>Note:</b> If the request does not include an Accept-Encoding field, and if the "identity" content-coding is unavailable, then content-codings
1044                  commonly understood by HTTP/1.0 clients (i.e., "gzip" and "compress") are preferred; some older clients improperly display
1045                  messages sent with other content-codings. The server might also make this decision based on information about the particular
1046                  user-agent or client.
1047               </li>
1048               <li><b>Note:</b> Most HTTP/1.0 applications do not recognize or obey qvalues associated with content-codings. This means that qvalues will
1049                  not work and are not permitted with x-gzip or x-compress.
1050               </li>
1051            </ul>
1052         </div>
1053         <div id="header.accept-language">
1054            <div id="rfc.iref.a.4"></div>
1055            <div id="rfc.iref.h.4"></div>
1056            <h2 id="rfc.section.5.4"><a href="#rfc.section.5.4">5.4</a>&nbsp;<a href="#header.accept-language">Accept-Language</a></h2>
1057            <p id="rfc.section.5.4.p.1">The Accept-Language request-header field is similar to Accept, but restricts the set of natural languages that are preferred
1058               as a response to the request. Language tags are defined in <a href="#language.tags" title="Language Tags">Section&nbsp;2.5</a>.
1059            </p>
1060            <div id="rfc.figure.u.22"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.24"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.25"></span>  Accept-Language = "Accept-Language" ":"
1061                    1#( language-range [ ";" "q" "=" qvalue ] )
1062  language-range  = ( ( 1*8ALPHA *( "-" 1*8ALPHA ) ) | "*" )
1063</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.4.p.3">Each language-range <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> be given an associated quality value which represents an estimate of the user's preference for the languages specified by
1064               that range. The quality value defaults to "q=1". For example,
1065            </p>
1066            <div id="rfc.figure.u.23"></div><pre class="text">    Accept-Language: da, en-gb;q=0.8, en;q=0.7
1067</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.4.p.5">would mean: "I prefer Danish, but will accept British English and other types of English." A language-range matches a language-tag
1068               if it exactly equals the tag, or if it exactly equals a prefix of the tag such that the first tag character following the
1069               prefix is "-". The special range "*", if present in the Accept-Language field, matches every tag not matched by any other
1070               range present in the Accept-Language field.
1071            </p>
1072            <ul class="empty">
1073               <li><b>Note:</b> This use of a prefix matching rule does not imply that language tags are assigned to languages in such a way that it is always
1074                  true that if a user understands a language with a certain tag, then this user will also understand all languages with tags
1075                  for which this tag is a prefix. The prefix rule simply allows the use of prefix tags if this is the case.
1076               </li>
1077            </ul>
1078            <p id="rfc.section.5.4.p.6">The language quality factor assigned to a language-tag by the Accept-Language field is the quality value of the longest language-range
1079               in the field that matches the language-tag. If no language-range in the field matches the tag, the language quality factor
1080               assigned is 0. If no Accept-Language header is present in the request, the server <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> assume that all languages are equally acceptable. If an Accept-Language header is present, then all languages which are assigned
1081               a quality factor greater than 0 are acceptable.
1082            </p>
1083            <p id="rfc.section.5.4.p.7">It might be contrary to the privacy expectations of the user to send an Accept-Language header with the complete linguistic
1084               preferences of the user in every request. For a discussion of this issue, see <a href="#privacy.issues.connected.to.accept.headers" title="Privacy Issues Connected to Accept Headers">Section&nbsp;7.1</a>.
1085            </p>
1086            <p id="rfc.section.5.4.p.8">As intelligibility is highly dependent on the individual user, it is recommended that client applications make the choice
1087               of linguistic preference available to the user. If the choice is not made available, then the Accept-Language header field <em class="bcp14">MUST NOT</em> be given in the request.
1088            </p>
1089            <ul class="empty">
1090               <li><b>Note:</b> When making the choice of linguistic preference available to the user, we remind implementors of the fact that users are not
1091                  familiar with the details of language matching as described above, and should provide appropriate guidance. As an example,
1092                  users might assume that on selecting "en-gb", they will be served any kind of English document if British English is not available.
1093                  A user agent might suggest in such a case to add "en" to get the best matching behavior.
1094               </li>
1095            </ul>
1096         </div>
1097         <div id="header.content-encoding">
1098            <div id="rfc.iref.c.2"></div>
1099            <div id="rfc.iref.h.5"></div>
1100            <h2 id="rfc.section.5.5"><a href="#rfc.section.5.5">5.5</a>&nbsp;<a href="#header.content-encoding">Content-Encoding</a></h2>
1101            <p id="rfc.section.5.5.p.1">The Content-Encoding entity-header field is used as a modifier to the media-type. When present, its value indicates what additional
1102               content codings have been applied to the entity-body, and thus what decoding mechanisms must be applied in order to obtain
1103               the media-type referenced by the Content-Type header field. Content-Encoding is primarily used to allow a document to be compressed
1104               without losing the identity of its underlying media type.
1105            </p>
1106            <div id="rfc.figure.u.24"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.26"></span>  Content-Encoding  = "Content-Encoding" ":" 1#content-coding
1107</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.5.p.3">Content codings are defined in <a href="#content.codings" title="Content Codings">Section&nbsp;2.2</a>. An example of its use is
1108            </p>
1109            <div id="rfc.figure.u.25"></div><pre class="text">    Content-Encoding: gzip
1110</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.5.p.5">The content-coding is a characteristic of the entity identified by the Request-URI. Typically, the entity-body is stored with
1111               this encoding and is only decoded before rendering or analogous usage. However, a non-transparent proxy <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> modify the content-coding if the new coding is known to be acceptable to the recipient, unless the "no-transform" cache-control
1112               directive is present in the message.
1113            </p>
1114            <p id="rfc.section.5.5.p.6">If the content-coding of an entity is not "identity", then the response <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> include a Content-Encoding entity-header (<a href="#header.content-encoding" id="rfc.xref.header.content-encoding.3" title="Content-Encoding">Section&nbsp;5.5</a>) that lists the non-identity content-coding(s) used.
1115            </p>
1116            <p id="rfc.section.5.5.p.7">If the content-coding of an entity in a request message is not acceptable to the origin server, the server <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> respond with a status code of 415 (Unsupported Media Type).
1117            </p>
1118            <p id="rfc.section.5.5.p.8">If multiple encodings have been applied to an entity, the content codings <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> be listed in the order in which they were applied. Additional information about the encoding parameters <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> be provided by other entity-header fields not defined by this specification.
1119            </p>
1120         </div>
1121         <div id="header.content-language">
1122            <div id="rfc.iref.c.3"></div>
1123            <div id="rfc.iref.h.6"></div>
1124            <h2 id="rfc.section.5.6"><a href="#rfc.section.5.6">5.6</a>&nbsp;<a href="#header.content-language">Content-Language</a></h2>
1125            <p id="rfc.section.5.6.p.1">The Content-Language entity-header field describes the natural language(s) of the intended audience for the enclosed entity.
1126               Note that this might not be equivalent to all the languages used within the entity-body.
1127            </p>
1128            <div id="rfc.figure.u.26"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.27"></span>  Content-Language  = "Content-Language" ":" 1#language-tag
1129</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.6.p.3">Language tags are defined in <a href="#language.tags" title="Language Tags">Section&nbsp;2.5</a>. The primary purpose of Content-Language is to allow a user to identify and differentiate entities according to the user's
1130               own preferred language. Thus, if the body content is intended only for a Danish-literate audience, the appropriate field is
1131            </p>
1132            <div id="rfc.figure.u.27"></div><pre class="text">    Content-Language: da
1133</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.6.p.5">If no Content-Language is specified, the default is that the content is intended for all language audiences. This might mean
1134               that the sender does not consider it to be specific to any natural language, or that the sender does not know for which language
1135               it is intended.
1136            </p>
1137            <p id="rfc.section.5.6.p.6">Multiple languages <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> be listed for content that is intended for multiple audiences. For example, a rendition of the "Treaty of Waitangi," presented
1138               simultaneously in the original Maori and English versions, would call for
1139            </p>
1140            <div id="rfc.figure.u.28"></div><pre class="text">    Content-Language: mi, en
1141</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.6.p.8">However, just because multiple languages are present within an entity does not mean that it is intended for multiple linguistic
1142               audiences. An example would be a beginner's language primer, such as "A First Lesson in Latin," which is clearly intended
1143               to be used by an English-literate audience. In this case, the Content-Language would properly only include "en".
1144            </p>
1145            <p id="rfc.section.5.6.p.9">Content-Language <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> be applied to any media type -- it is not limited to textual documents.
1146            </p>
1147         </div>
1148         <div id="header.content-location">
1149            <div id="rfc.iref.c.4"></div>
1150            <div id="rfc.iref.h.7"></div>
1151            <h2 id="rfc.section.5.7"><a href="#rfc.section.5.7">5.7</a>&nbsp;<a href="#header.content-location">Content-Location</a></h2>
1152            <p id="rfc.section.5.7.p.1">The Content-Location entity-header field <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> be used to supply the resource location for the entity enclosed in the message when that entity is accessible from a location
1153               separate from the requested resource's URI. A server <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> provide a Content-Location for the variant corresponding to the response entity; especially in the case where a resource has
1154               multiple entities associated with it, and those entities actually have separate locations by which they might be individually
1155               accessed, the server <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> provide a Content-Location for the particular variant which is returned.
1156            </p>
1157            <div id="rfc.figure.u.29"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.28"></span>  Content-Location = "Content-Location" ":"
1158                    ( absoluteURI | relativeURI )
1159</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.7.p.3">The value of Content-Location also defines the base URI for the entity.</p>
1160            <p id="rfc.section.5.7.p.4">The Content-Location value is not a replacement for the original requested URI; it is only a statement of the location of
1161               the resource corresponding to this particular entity at the time of the request. Future requests <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> specify the Content-Location URI as the request-URI if the desire is to identify the source of that particular entity.
1162            </p>
1163            <p id="rfc.section.5.7.p.5">A cache cannot assume that an entity with a Content-Location different from the URI used to retrieve it can be used to respond
1164               to later requests on that Content-Location URI. However, the Content-Location can be used to differentiate between multiple
1165               entities retrieved from a single requested resource, as described in <a href="p6-cache.html#caching.negotiated.responses" title="Caching Negotiated Responses">Section 7</a> of <a href="#Part6" id="rfc.xref.Part6.3"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 6: Caching">[Part6]</cite></a>.
1166            </p>
1167            <p id="rfc.section.5.7.p.6">If the Content-Location is a relative URI, the relative URI is interpreted relative to the Request-URI.</p>
1168            <p id="rfc.section.5.7.p.7">The meaning of the Content-Location header in PUT or POST requests is undefined; servers are free to ignore it in those cases.</p>
1169         </div>
1170         <div id="header.content-md5">
1171            <div id="rfc.iref.c.5"></div>
1172            <div id="rfc.iref.h.8"></div>
1173            <h2 id="rfc.section.5.8"><a href="#rfc.section.5.8">5.8</a>&nbsp;<a href="#header.content-md5">Content-MD5</a></h2>
1174            <p id="rfc.section.5.8.p.1">The Content-MD5 entity-header field, as defined in <a href="#RFC1864" id="rfc.xref.RFC1864.1"><cite title="The Content-MD5 Header Field">[RFC1864]</cite></a>, is an MD5 digest of the entity-body for the purpose of providing an end-to-end message integrity check (MIC) of the entity-body.
1175               (Note: a MIC is good for detecting accidental modification of the entity-body in transit, but is not proof against malicious
1176               attacks.)
1177            </p>
1178            <div id="rfc.figure.u.30"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.29"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.30"></span>  Content-MD5   = "Content-MD5" ":" md5-digest
1179  md5-digest    = &lt;base64 of 128 bit MD5 digest as per <a href="#RFC1864" id="rfc.xref.RFC1864.2"><cite title="The Content-MD5 Header Field">[RFC1864]</cite></a>&gt;
1180</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.8.p.3">The Content-MD5 header field <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> be generated by an origin server or client to function as an integrity check of the entity-body. Only origin servers or clients <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> generate the Content-MD5 header field; proxies and gateways <em class="bcp14">MUST NOT</em> generate it, as this would defeat its value as an end-to-end integrity check. Any recipient of the entity-body, including
1181               gateways and proxies, <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> check that the digest value in this header field matches that of the entity-body as received.
1182            </p>
1183            <p id="rfc.section.5.8.p.4">The MD5 digest is computed based on the content of the entity-body, including any content-coding that has been applied, but
1184               not including any transfer-encoding applied to the message-body. If the message is received with a transfer-encoding, that
1185               encoding <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> be removed prior to checking the Content-MD5 value against the received entity.
1186            </p>
1187            <p id="rfc.section.5.8.p.5">This has the result that the digest is computed on the octets of the entity-body exactly as, and in the order that, they would
1188               be sent if no transfer-encoding were being applied.
1189            </p>
1190            <p id="rfc.section.5.8.p.6">HTTP extends RFC 1864 to permit the digest to be computed for MIME composite media-types (e.g., multipart/* and message/rfc822),
1191               but this does not change how the digest is computed as defined in the preceding paragraph.
1192            </p>
1193            <p id="rfc.section.5.8.p.7">There are several consequences of this. The entity-body for composite types <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> contain many body-parts, each with its own MIME and HTTP headers (including Content-MD5, Content-Transfer-Encoding, and Content-Encoding
1194               headers). If a body-part has a Content-Transfer-Encoding or Content-Encoding header, it is assumed that the content of the
1195               body-part has had the encoding applied, and the body-part is included in the Content-MD5 digest as is -- i.e., after the application.
1196               The Transfer-Encoding header field is not allowed within body-parts.
1197            </p>
1198            <p id="rfc.section.5.8.p.8">Conversion of all line breaks to CRLF <em class="bcp14">MUST NOT</em> be done before computing or checking the digest: the line break convention used in the text actually transmitted <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> be left unaltered when computing the digest.
1199            </p>
1200            <ul class="empty">
1201               <li><b>Note:</b> while the definition of Content-MD5 is exactly the same for HTTP as in RFC 1864 for MIME entity-bodies, there are several
1202                  ways in which the application of Content-MD5 to HTTP entity-bodies differs from its application to MIME entity-bodies. One
1203                  is that HTTP, unlike MIME, does not use Content-Transfer-Encoding, and does use Transfer-Encoding and Content-Encoding. Another
1204                  is that HTTP more frequently uses binary content types than MIME, so it is worth noting that, in such cases, the byte order
1205                  used to compute the digest is the transmission byte order defined for the type. Lastly, HTTP allows transmission of text types
1206                  with any of several line break conventions and not just the canonical form using CRLF.
1207               </li>
1208            </ul>
1209         </div>
1210         <div id="header.content-type">
1211            <div id="rfc.iref.c.6"></div>
1212            <div id="rfc.iref.h.9"></div>
1213            <h2 id="rfc.section.5.9"><a href="#rfc.section.5.9">5.9</a>&nbsp;<a href="#header.content-type">Content-Type</a></h2>
1214            <p id="rfc.section.5.9.p.1">The Content-Type entity-header field indicates the media type of the entity-body sent to the recipient or, in the case of
1215               the HEAD method, the media type that would have been sent had the request been a GET.
1216            </p>
1217            <div id="rfc.figure.u.31"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.31"></span>  Content-Type   = "Content-Type" ":" media-type
1218</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.9.p.3">Media types are defined in <a href="#media.types" title="Media Types">Section&nbsp;2.3</a>. An example of the field is
1219            </p>
1220            <div id="rfc.figure.u.32"></div><pre class="text">    Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-4
1221</pre><p id="rfc.section.5.9.p.5">Further discussion of methods for identifying the media type of an entity is provided in <a href="#type" title="Type">Section&nbsp;3.2.1</a>.
1222            </p>
1223         </div>
1224      </div>
1225      <div id="IANA.considerations">
1226         <h1 id="rfc.section.6"><a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a>&nbsp;<a href="#IANA.considerations">IANA Considerations</a></h1>
1227         <p id="rfc.section.6.p.1">TBD.</p>
1228      </div>
1229      <div id="security.considerations">
1230         <h1 id="rfc.section.7"><a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a>&nbsp;<a href="#security.considerations">Security Considerations</a></h1>
1231         <p id="rfc.section.7.p.1">This section is meant to inform application developers, information providers, and users of the security limitations in HTTP/1.1
1232            as described by this document. The discussion does not include definitive solutions to the problems revealed, though it does
1233            make some suggestions for reducing security risks.
1234         </p>
1235         <div id="privacy.issues.connected.to.accept.headers">
1236            <h2 id="rfc.section.7.1"><a href="#rfc.section.7.1">7.1</a>&nbsp;<a href="#privacy.issues.connected.to.accept.headers">Privacy Issues Connected to Accept Headers</a></h2>
1237            <p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.1">Accept request-headers can reveal information about the user to all servers which are accessed. The Accept-Language header
1238               in particular can reveal information the user would consider to be of a private nature, because the understanding of particular
1239               languages is often strongly correlated to the membership of a particular ethnic group. User agents which offer the option
1240               to configure the contents of an Accept-Language header to be sent in every request are strongly encouraged to let the configuration
1241               process include a message which makes the user aware of the loss of privacy involved.
1242            </p>
1243            <p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.2">An approach that limits the loss of privacy would be for a user agent to omit the sending of Accept-Language headers by default,
1244               and to ask the user whether or not to start sending Accept-Language headers to a server if it detects, by looking for any
1245               Vary response-header fields generated by the server, that such sending could improve the quality of service.
1246            </p>
1247            <p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.3">Elaborate user-customized accept header fields sent in every request, in particular if these include quality values, can be
1248               used by servers as relatively reliable and long-lived user identifiers. Such user identifiers would allow content providers
1249               to do click-trail tracking, and would allow collaborating content providers to match cross-server click-trails or form submissions
1250               of individual users. Note that for many users not behind a proxy, the network address of the host running the user agent will
1251               also serve as a long-lived user identifier. In environments where proxies are used to enhance privacy, user agents ought to
1252               be conservative in offering accept header configuration options to end users. As an extreme privacy measure, proxies could
1253               filter the accept headers in relayed requests. General purpose user agents which provide a high degree of header configurability <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> warn users about the loss of privacy which can be involved.
1254            </p>
1255         </div>
1256         <div id="content-disposition.issues">
1257            <h2 id="rfc.section.7.2"><a href="#rfc.section.7.2">7.2</a>&nbsp;<a href="#content-disposition.issues">Content-Disposition Issues</a></h2>
1258            <p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.1"><a href="#RFC1806" id="rfc.xref.RFC1806.1"><cite title="Communicating Presentation Information in Internet Messages: The Content-Disposition Header">[RFC1806]</cite></a>, from which the often implemented Content-Disposition (see <a href="#content-disposition" id="rfc.xref.content-disposition.1" title="Content-Disposition">Appendix&nbsp;B.1</a>) header in HTTP is derived, has a number of very serious security considerations. Content-Disposition is not part of the
1259               HTTP standard, but since it is widely implemented, we are documenting its use and risks for implementors. See <a href="#RFC2183" id="rfc.xref.RFC2183.1"><cite title="Communicating Presentation Information in Internet Messages: The Content-Disposition Header Field">[RFC2183]</cite></a> (which updates <a href="#RFC1806" id="rfc.xref.RFC1806.2"><cite title="Communicating Presentation Information in Internet Messages: The Content-Disposition Header">[RFC1806]</cite></a>) for details.
1260            </p>
1261         </div>
1262      </div>
1263      <div id="ack">
1264         <h1 id="rfc.section.8"><a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a>&nbsp;<a href="#ack">Acknowledgments</a></h1>
1265      </div>
1266      <h1 id="rfc.references"><a id="rfc.section.9" href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> References
1267      </h1>
1268      <h2 id="rfc.references.1"><a href="#rfc.section.9.1" id="rfc.section.9.1">9.1</a> Normative References
1269      </h2>
1270      <table>
1271         <tr>
1272            <td class="reference"><b id="ISO-8859-1">[ISO-8859-1]</b></td>
1273            <td class="top">International Organization for Standardization, “Information technology -- 8-bit single-byte coded graphic character sets -- Part 1: Latin alphabet No. 1”, ISO/IEC&nbsp;8859-1:1998, 1998.</td>
1274         </tr>
1275         <tr>
1276            <td class="reference"><b id="Part1">[Part1]</b></td>
1277            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:fielding@gbiv.com" title="Day Software">Fielding, R., Ed.</a>, <a href="mailto:jg@laptop.org" title="One Laptop per Child">Gettys, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:JeffMogul@acm.org" title="Hewlett-Packard Company">Mogul, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft Corporation">Frystyk, H.</a>, <a href="mailto:LMM@acm.org" title="Adobe Systems, Incorporated">Masinter, L.</a>, <a href="mailto:paulle@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft Corporation">Leach, P.</a>, <a href="mailto:timbl@w3.org" title="World Wide Web Consortium">Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a href="mailto:ylafon@w3.org" title="World Wide Web Consortium">Lafon, Y., Ed.</a>, and <a href="mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de" title="greenbytes GmbH">J. Reschke, Ed.</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-01">HTTP/1.1, part 1: URIs, Connections, and Message Parsing</a>”, Internet-Draft&nbsp;draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-01 (work in progress), January&nbsp;2008.
1278            </td>
1279         </tr>
1280         <tr>
1281            <td class="reference"><b id="Part2">[Part2]</b></td>
1282            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:fielding@gbiv.com" title="Day Software">Fielding, R., Ed.</a>, <a href="mailto:jg@laptop.org" title="One Laptop per Child">Gettys, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:JeffMogul@acm.org" title="Hewlett-Packard Company">Mogul, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft Corporation">Frystyk, H.</a>, <a href="mailto:LMM@acm.org" title="Adobe Systems, Incorporated">Masinter, L.</a>, <a href="mailto:paulle@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft Corporation">Leach, P.</a>, <a href="mailto:timbl@w3.org" title="World Wide Web Consortium">Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a href="mailto:ylafon@w3.org" title="World Wide Web Consortium">Lafon, Y., Ed.</a>, and <a href="mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de" title="greenbytes GmbH">J. Reschke, Ed.</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-01">HTTP/1.1, part 2: Message Semantics</a>”, Internet-Draft&nbsp;draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-01 (work in progress), January&nbsp;2008.
1283            </td>
1284         </tr>
1285         <tr>
1286            <td class="reference"><b id="Part4">[Part4]</b></td>
1287            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:fielding@gbiv.com" title="Day Software">Fielding, R., Ed.</a>, <a href="mailto:jg@laptop.org" title="One Laptop per Child">Gettys, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:JeffMogul@acm.org" title="Hewlett-Packard Company">Mogul, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft Corporation">Frystyk, H.</a>, <a href="mailto:LMM@acm.org" title="Adobe Systems, Incorporated">Masinter, L.</a>, <a href="mailto:paulle@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft Corporation">Leach, P.</a>, <a href="mailto:timbl@w3.org" title="World Wide Web Consortium">Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a href="mailto:ylafon@w3.org" title="World Wide Web Consortium">Lafon, Y., Ed.</a>, and <a href="mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de" title="greenbytes GmbH">J. Reschke, Ed.</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-01">HTTP/1.1, part 4: Conditional Requests</a>”, Internet-Draft&nbsp;draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-01 (work in progress), January&nbsp;2008.
1288            </td>
1289         </tr>
1290         <tr>
1291            <td class="reference"><b id="Part5">[Part5]</b></td>
1292            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:fielding@gbiv.com" title="Day Software">Fielding, R., Ed.</a>, <a href="mailto:jg@laptop.org" title="One Laptop per Child">Gettys, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:JeffMogul@acm.org" title="Hewlett-Packard Company">Mogul, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft Corporation">Frystyk, H.</a>, <a href="mailto:LMM@acm.org" title="Adobe Systems, Incorporated">Masinter, L.</a>, <a href="mailto:paulle@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft Corporation">Leach, P.</a>, <a href="mailto:timbl@w3.org" title="World Wide Web Consortium">Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a href="mailto:ylafon@w3.org" title="World Wide Web Consortium">Lafon, Y., Ed.</a>, and <a href="mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de" title="greenbytes GmbH">J. Reschke, Ed.</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-01">HTTP/1.1, part 5: Range Requests and Partial Responses</a>”, Internet-Draft&nbsp;draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-01 (work in progress), January&nbsp;2008.
1293            </td>
1294         </tr>
1295         <tr>
1296            <td class="reference"><b id="Part6">[Part6]</b></td>
1297            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:fielding@gbiv.com" title="Day Software">Fielding, R., Ed.</a>, <a href="mailto:jg@laptop.org" title="One Laptop per Child">Gettys, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:JeffMogul@acm.org" title="Hewlett-Packard Company">Mogul, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft Corporation">Frystyk, H.</a>, <a href="mailto:LMM@acm.org" title="Adobe Systems, Incorporated">Masinter, L.</a>, <a href="mailto:paulle@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft Corporation">Leach, P.</a>, <a href="mailto:timbl@w3.org" title="World Wide Web Consortium">Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a href="mailto:ylafon@w3.org" title="World Wide Web Consortium">Lafon, Y., Ed.</a>, and <a href="mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de" title="greenbytes GmbH">J. Reschke, Ed.</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-01">HTTP/1.1, part 6: Caching</a>”, Internet-Draft&nbsp;draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-01 (work in progress), January&nbsp;2008.
1298            </td>
1299         </tr>
1300         <tr>
1301            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC1766">[RFC1766]</b></td>
1302            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no" title="UNINETT">Alvestrand, H.</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1766">Tags for the Identification of Languages</a>”, RFC&nbsp;1766, March&nbsp;1995.
1303            </td>
1304         </tr>
1305         <tr>
1306            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC1864">[RFC1864]</b></td>
1307            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:jgm+@cmu.edu" title="Carnegie Mellon University">Myers, J.</a> and <a href="mailto:mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us" title="Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.">M. Rose</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1864">The Content-MD5 Header Field</a>”, RFC&nbsp;1864, October&nbsp;1995.
1308            </td>
1309         </tr>
1310         <tr>
1311            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC1950">[RFC1950]</b></td>
1312            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:ghost@aladdin.com" title="Aladdin Enterprises">Deutsch, L.</a> and J-L. Gailly, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1950">ZLIB Compressed Data Format Specification version 3.3</a>”, RFC&nbsp;1950, May&nbsp;1996.<br>RFC1950 is an Informational RFC, thus it may be less stable than this specification. On the other hand, this downward reference
1313               was present since <a href="#RFC2068" id="rfc.xref.RFC2068.1"><cite title="Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1">[RFC2068]</cite></a> (published in 1997), therefore it is unlikely to cause problems in practice.
1314            </td>
1315         </tr>
1316         <tr>
1317            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC1951">[RFC1951]</b></td>
1318            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:ghost@aladdin.com" title="Aladdin Enterprises">Deutsch, P.</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1951">DEFLATE Compressed Data Format Specification version 1.3</a>”, RFC&nbsp;1951, May&nbsp;1996.<br>RFC1951 is an Informational RFC, thus it may be less stable than this specification. On the other hand, this downward reference
1319               was present since <a href="#RFC2068" id="rfc.xref.RFC2068.2"><cite title="Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1">[RFC2068]</cite></a> (published in 1997), therefore it is unlikely to cause problems in practice.
1320            </td>
1321         </tr>
1322         <tr>
1323            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC1952">[RFC1952]</b></td>
1324            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:ghost@aladdin.com" title="Aladdin Enterprises">Deutsch, P.</a>, <a href="mailto:gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu">Gailly, J-L.</a>, <a href="mailto:madler@alumni.caltech.edu">Adler, M.</a>, <a href="mailto:ghost@aladdin.com">Deutsch, L.</a>, and <a href="mailto:randeg@alumni.rpi.edu">G. Randers-Pehrson</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1952">GZIP file format specification version 4.3</a>”, RFC&nbsp;1952, May&nbsp;1996.<br>RFC1952 is an Informational RFC, thus it may be less stable than this specification. On the other hand, this downward reference
1325               was present since <a href="#RFC2068" id="rfc.xref.RFC2068.3"><cite title="Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1">[RFC2068]</cite></a> (published in 1997), therefore it is unlikely to cause problems in practice.
1326            </td>
1327         </tr>
1328         <tr>
1329            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC2045">[RFC2045]</b></td>
1330            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:ned@innosoft.com" title="Innosoft International, Inc.">Freed, N.</a> and <a href="mailto:nsb@nsb.fv.com" title="First Virtual Holdings">N. Borenstein</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2045">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies</a>”, RFC&nbsp;2045, November&nbsp;1996.
1331            </td>
1332         </tr>
1333         <tr>
1334            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC2046">[RFC2046]</b></td>
1335            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:ned@innosoft.com" title="Innosoft International, Inc.">Freed, N.</a> and <a href="mailto:nsb@nsb.fv.com" title="First Virtual Holdings">N. Borenstein</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2046">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types</a>”, RFC&nbsp;2046, November&nbsp;1996.
1336            </td>
1337         </tr>
1338         <tr>
1339            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b></td>
1340            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:sob@harvard.edu" title="Harvard University">Bradner, S.</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>”, BCP&nbsp;14, RFC&nbsp;2119, March&nbsp;1997.
1341            </td>
1342         </tr>
1343         <tr>
1344            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC4288">[RFC4288]</b></td>
1345            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:ned.freed@mrochek.com" title="Sun Microsystems">Freed, N.</a> and <a href="mailto:klensin+ietf@jck.com">J. Klensin</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4288">Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures</a>”, BCP&nbsp;13, RFC&nbsp;4288, December&nbsp;2005.
1346            </td>
1347         </tr>
1348      </table>
1349      <h2 id="rfc.references.2"><a href="#rfc.section.9.2" id="rfc.section.9.2">9.2</a> Informative References
1350      </h2>
1351      <table>
1352         <tr>
1353            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC1806">[RFC1806]</b></td>
1354            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:rens@century.com" title="New Century Systems">Troost, R.</a> and <a href="mailto:sdorner@qualcomm.com" title="QUALCOMM Incorporated">S. Dorner</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1806">Communicating Presentation Information in Internet Messages: The Content-Disposition Header</a>”, RFC&nbsp;1806, June&nbsp;1995.
1355            </td>
1356         </tr>
1357         <tr>
1358            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC1945">[RFC1945]</b></td>
1359            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:timbl@w3.org" title="MIT, Laboratory for Computer Science">Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a href="mailto:fielding@ics.uci.edu" title="University of California, Irvine, Department of Information and Computer Science">Fielding, R.</a>, and <a href="mailto:frystyk@w3.org" title="W3 Consortium, MIT Laboratory for Computer Science">H. Nielsen</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1945">Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.0</a>”, RFC&nbsp;1945, May&nbsp;1996.
1360            </td>
1361         </tr>
1362         <tr>
1363            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC2049">[RFC2049]</b></td>
1364            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:ned@innosoft.com" title="Innosoft International, Inc.">Freed, N.</a> and <a href="mailto:nsb@nsb.fv.com" title="First Virtual Holdings">N. Borenstein</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2049">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Five: Conformance Criteria and Examples</a>”, RFC&nbsp;2049, November&nbsp;1996.
1365            </td>
1366         </tr>
1367         <tr>
1368            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC2068">[RFC2068]</b></td>
1369            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:fielding@ics.uci.edu" title="University of California, Irvine, Department of Information and Computer Science">Fielding, R.</a>, <a href="mailto:jg@w3.org" title="MIT Laboratory for Computer Science">Gettys, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:mogul@wrl.dec.com" title="Digital Equipment Corporation, Western Research Laboratory">Mogul, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:frystyk@w3.org" title="MIT Laboratory for Computer Science">Nielsen, H.</a>, and <a href="mailto:timbl@w3.org" title="MIT Laboratory for Computer Science">T. Berners-Lee</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2068">Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1</a>”, RFC&nbsp;2068, January&nbsp;1997.
1370            </td>
1371         </tr>
1372         <tr>
1373            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC2076">[RFC2076]</b></td>
1374            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:jpalme@dsv.su.se" title="Stockholm University/KTH">Palme, J.</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2076">Common Internet Message Headers</a>”, RFC&nbsp;2076, February&nbsp;1997.
1375            </td>
1376         </tr>
1377         <tr>
1378            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC2183">[RFC2183]</b></td>
1379            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:rens@century.com" title="New Century Systems">Troost, R.</a>, <a href="mailto:sdorner@qualcomm.com" title="QUALCOMM Incorporated">Dorner, S.</a>, and <a href="mailto:moore@cs.utk.edu" title="Department of Computer Science">K. Moore</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2183">Communicating Presentation Information in Internet Messages: The Content-Disposition Header Field</a>”, RFC&nbsp;2183, August&nbsp;1997.
1380            </td>
1381         </tr>
1382         <tr>
1383            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC2277">[RFC2277]</b></td>
1384            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no" title="UNINETT">Alvestrand, H.</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2277">IETF Policy on Character Sets and Languages</a>”, BCP&nbsp;18, RFC&nbsp;2277, January&nbsp;1998.
1385            </td>
1386         </tr>
1387         <tr>
1388            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC2388">[RFC2388]</b></td>
1389            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:masinter@parc.xerox.com" title="Xerox Palo Alto Research Center">Masinter, L.</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2388">Returning Values from Forms: multipart/form-data</a>”, RFC&nbsp;2388, August&nbsp;1998.
1390            </td>
1391         </tr>
1392         <tr>
1393            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC2557">[RFC2557]</b></td>
1394            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:jpalme@dsv.su.se" title="Stockholm University and KTH">Palme, F.</a>, <a href="mailto:alexhop@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft Corporation">Hopmann, A.</a>, <a href="mailto:Shelness@lotus.com" title="Lotus Development Corporation">Shelness, N.</a>, and <a href="mailto:stef@nma.com">E. Stefferud</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2557">MIME Encapsulation of Aggregate Documents, such as HTML (MHTML)</a>”, RFC&nbsp;2557, March&nbsp;1999.
1395            </td>
1396         </tr>
1397         <tr>
1398            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC2616">[RFC2616]</b></td>
1399            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:fielding@ics.uci.edu" title="University of California, Irvine">Fielding, R.</a>, <a href="mailto:jg@w3.org" title="W3C">Gettys, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:mogul@wrl.dec.com" title="Compaq Computer Corporation">Mogul, J.</a>, <a href="mailto:frystyk@w3.org" title="MIT Laboratory for Computer Science">Frystyk, H.</a>, <a href="mailto:masinter@parc.xerox.com" title="Xerox Corporation">Masinter, L.</a>, <a href="mailto:paulle@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft Corporation">Leach, P.</a>, and <a href="mailto:timbl@w3.org" title="W3C">T. Berners-Lee</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616">Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1</a>”, RFC&nbsp;2616, June&nbsp;1999.
1400            </td>
1401         </tr>
1402         <tr>
1403            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC2822">[RFC2822]</b></td>
1404            <td class="top">Resnick, P., “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2822">Internet Message Format</a>”, RFC&nbsp;2822, April&nbsp;2001.
1405            </td>
1406         </tr>
1407         <tr>
1408            <td class="reference"><b id="RFC3629">[RFC3629]</b></td>
1409            <td class="top"><a href="mailto:fyergeau@alis.com" title="Alis Technologies">Yergeau, F.</a>, “<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3629">UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646</a>”, RFC&nbsp;3629, STD&nbsp;63, November&nbsp;2003.
1410            </td>
1411         </tr>
1412      </table>
1413      <div id="differences.between.http.entities.and.rfc.2045.entities">
1414         <h1 id="rfc.section.A" class="np"><a href="#rfc.section.A">A.</a>&nbsp;<a href="#differences.between.http.entities.and.rfc.2045.entities">Differences Between HTTP Entities and RFC 2045 Entities</a></h1>
1415         <p id="rfc.section.A.p.1">HTTP/1.1 uses many of the constructs defined for Internet Mail (<a href="#RFC2822" id="rfc.xref.RFC2822.1"><cite title="Internet Message Format">[RFC2822]</cite></a>) and the Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME <a href="#RFC2045" id="rfc.xref.RFC2045.1"><cite title="Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies">[RFC2045]</cite></a>) to allow entities to be transmitted in an open variety of representations and with extensible mechanisms. However, RFC 2045
1416            discusses mail, and HTTP has a few features that are different from those described in RFC 2045. These differences were carefully
1417            chosen to optimize performance over binary connections, to allow greater freedom in the use of new media types, to make date
1418            comparisons easier, and to acknowledge the practice of some early HTTP servers and clients.
1419         </p>
1420         <p id="rfc.section.A.p.2">This appendix describes specific areas where HTTP differs from RFC 2045. Proxies and gateways to strict MIME environments <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> be aware of these differences and provide the appropriate conversions where necessary. Proxies and gateways from MIME environments
1421            to HTTP also need to be aware of the differences because some conversions might be required.
1422         </p>
1423         <div id="mime-version">
1424            <h2 id="rfc.section.A.1"><a href="#rfc.section.A.1">A.1</a>&nbsp;<a href="#mime-version">MIME-Version</a></h2>
1425            <p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.1">HTTP is not a MIME-compliant protocol. However, HTTP/1.1 messages <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> include a single MIME-Version general-header field to indicate what version of the MIME protocol was used to construct the
1426               message. Use of the MIME-Version header field indicates that the message is in full compliance with the MIME protocol (as
1427               defined in <a href="#RFC2045" id="rfc.xref.RFC2045.2"><cite title="Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies">[RFC2045]</cite></a>). Proxies/gateways are responsible for ensuring full compliance (where possible) when exporting HTTP messages to strict MIME
1428               environments.
1429            </p>
1430            <div id="rfc.figure.u.33"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.32"></span>  MIME-Version   = "MIME-Version" ":" 1*DIGIT "." 1*DIGIT
1431</pre><p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.3">MIME version "1.0" is the default for use in HTTP/1.1. However, HTTP/1.1 message parsing and semantics are defined by this
1432               document and not the MIME specification.
1433            </p>
1434         </div>
1435         <div id="conversion.to.canonical.form">
1436            <h2 id="rfc.section.A.2"><a href="#rfc.section.A.2">A.2</a>&nbsp;<a href="#conversion.to.canonical.form">Conversion to Canonical Form</a></h2>
1437            <p id="rfc.section.A.2.p.1"><a href="#RFC2045" id="rfc.xref.RFC2045.3"><cite title="Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies">[RFC2045]</cite></a> requires that an Internet mail entity be converted to canonical form prior to being transferred, as described in <a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2049#section-4">Section 4</a> of <a href="#RFC2049" id="rfc.xref.RFC2049.1"><cite title="Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Five: Conformance Criteria and Examples">[RFC2049]</cite></a>. <a href="#canonicalization.and.text.defaults" title="Canonicalization and Text Defaults">Section&nbsp;2.3.1</a> of this document describes the forms allowed for subtypes of the "text" media type when transmitted over HTTP. <a href="#RFC2046" id="rfc.xref.RFC2046.3"><cite title="Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types">[RFC2046]</cite></a> requires that content with a type of "text" represent line breaks as CRLF and forbids the use of CR or LF outside of line
1438               break sequences. HTTP allows CRLF, bare CR, and bare LF to indicate a line break within text content when a message is transmitted
1439               over HTTP.
1440            </p>
1441            <p id="rfc.section.A.2.p.2">Where it is possible, a proxy or gateway from HTTP to a strict MIME environment <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> translate all line breaks within the text media types described in <a href="#canonicalization.and.text.defaults" title="Canonicalization and Text Defaults">Section&nbsp;2.3.1</a> of this document to the RFC 2049 canonical form of CRLF. Note, however, that this might be complicated by the presence of
1442               a Content-Encoding and by the fact that HTTP allows the use of some character sets which do not use octets 13 and 10 to represent
1443               CR and LF, as is the case for some multi-byte character sets.
1444            </p>
1445            <p id="rfc.section.A.2.p.3">Implementors should note that conversion will break any cryptographic checksums applied to the original content unless the
1446               original content is already in canonical form. Therefore, the canonical form is recommended for any content that uses such
1447               checksums in HTTP.
1448            </p>
1449         </div>
1450         <div id="introduction.of.content-encoding">
1451            <h2 id="rfc.section.A.3"><a href="#rfc.section.A.3">A.3</a>&nbsp;<a href="#introduction.of.content-encoding">Introduction of Content-Encoding</a></h2>
1452            <p id="rfc.section.A.3.p.1">RFC 2045 does not include any concept equivalent to HTTP/1.1's Content-Encoding header field. Since this acts as a modifier
1453               on the media type, proxies and gateways from HTTP to MIME-compliant protocols <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> either change the value of the Content-Type header field or decode the entity-body before forwarding the message. (Some experimental
1454               applications of Content-Type for Internet mail have used a media-type parameter of ";conversions=&lt;content-coding&gt;" to perform
1455               a function equivalent to Content-Encoding. However, this parameter is not part of RFC 2045).
1456            </p>
1457         </div>
1458         <div id="no.content-transfer-encoding">
1459            <h2 id="rfc.section.A.4"><a href="#rfc.section.A.4">A.4</a>&nbsp;<a href="#no.content-transfer-encoding">No Content-Transfer-Encoding</a></h2>
1460            <p id="rfc.section.A.4.p.1">HTTP does not use the Content-Transfer-Encoding field of RFC 2045. Proxies and gateways from MIME-compliant protocols to HTTP <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> remove any Content-Transfer-Encoding prior to delivering the response message to an HTTP client.
1461            </p>
1462            <p id="rfc.section.A.4.p.2">Proxies and gateways from HTTP to MIME-compliant protocols are responsible for ensuring that the message is in the correct
1463               format and encoding for safe transport on that protocol, where "safe transport" is defined by the limitations of the protocol
1464               being used. Such a proxy or gateway <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> label the data with an appropriate Content-Transfer-Encoding if doing so will improve the likelihood of safe transport over
1465               the destination protocol.
1466            </p>
1467         </div>
1468         <div id="introduction.of.transfer-encoding">
1469            <h2 id="rfc.section.A.5"><a href="#rfc.section.A.5">A.5</a>&nbsp;<a href="#introduction.of.transfer-encoding">Introduction of Transfer-Encoding</a></h2>
1470            <p id="rfc.section.A.5.p.1">HTTP/1.1 introduces the Transfer-Encoding header field (<a href="p1-messaging.html#header.transfer-encoding" title="Transfer-Encoding">Section 8.7</a> of <a href="#Part1" id="rfc.xref.Part1.4"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 1: URIs, Connections, and Message Parsing">[Part1]</cite></a>). Proxies/gateways <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> remove any transfer-coding prior to forwarding a message via a MIME-compliant protocol.
1471            </p>
1472         </div>
1473         <div id="mhtml.line.length">
1474            <h2 id="rfc.section.A.6"><a href="#rfc.section.A.6">A.6</a>&nbsp;<a href="#mhtml.line.length">MHTML and Line Length Limitations</a></h2>
1475            <p id="rfc.section.A.6.p.1">HTTP implementations which share code with MHTML <a href="#RFC2557" id="rfc.xref.RFC2557.1"><cite title="MIME Encapsulation of Aggregate Documents, such as HTML (MHTML)">[RFC2557]</cite></a> implementations need to be aware of MIME line length limitations. Since HTTP does not have this limitation, HTTP does not
1476               fold long lines. MHTML messages being transported by HTTP follow all conventions of MHTML, including line length limitations
1477               and folding, canonicalization, etc., since HTTP transports all message-bodies as payload (see <a href="#multipart.types" title="Multipart Types">Section&nbsp;2.3.2</a>) and does not interpret the content or any MIME header lines that might be contained therein.
1478            </p>
1479         </div>
1480      </div>
1481      <div id="additional.features">
1482         <h1 id="rfc.section.B"><a href="#rfc.section.B">B.</a>&nbsp;<a href="#additional.features">Additional Features</a></h1>
1483         <p id="rfc.section.B.p.1"><a href="#RFC1945" id="rfc.xref.RFC1945.1"><cite title="Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.0">[RFC1945]</cite></a> and <a href="#RFC2068" id="rfc.xref.RFC2068.4"><cite title="Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1">[RFC2068]</cite></a> document protocol elements used by some existing HTTP implementations, but not consistently and correctly across most HTTP/1.1
1484            applications. Implementors are advised to be aware of these features, but cannot rely upon their presence in, or interoperability
1485            with, other HTTP/1.1 applications. Some of these describe proposed experimental features, and some describe features that
1486            experimental deployment found lacking that are now addressed in the base HTTP/1.1 specification.
1487         </p>
1488         <p id="rfc.section.B.p.2">A number of other headers, such as Content-Disposition and Title, from SMTP and MIME are also often implemented (see <a href="#RFC2076" id="rfc.xref.RFC2076.1"><cite title="Common Internet Message Headers">[RFC2076]</cite></a>).
1489         </p>
1490         <div id="content-disposition">
1491            <div id="rfc.iref.h.10"></div>
1492            <div id="rfc.iref.c.7"></div>
1493            <h2 id="rfc.section.B.1"><a href="#rfc.section.B.1">B.1</a>&nbsp;<a href="#content-disposition">Content-Disposition</a></h2>
1494            <p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.1">The Content-Disposition response-header field has been proposed as a means for the origin server to suggest a default filename
1495               if the user requests that the content is saved to a file. This usage is derived from the definition of Content-Disposition
1496               in <a href="#RFC1806" id="rfc.xref.RFC1806.3"><cite title="Communicating Presentation Information in Internet Messages: The Content-Disposition Header">[RFC1806]</cite></a>.
1497            </p>
1498            <div id="rfc.figure.u.34"></div><pre class="inline"><span id="rfc.iref.g.33"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.34"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.35"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.36"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.37"></span><span id="rfc.iref.g.38"></span>  content-disposition = "Content-Disposition" ":"
1499                        disposition-type *( ";" disposition-parm )
1500  disposition-type = "attachment" | disp-extension-token
1501  disposition-parm = filename-parm | disp-extension-parm
1502  filename-parm = "filename" "=" quoted-string
1503  disp-extension-token = token
1504  disp-extension-parm = token "=" ( token | quoted-string )
1505</pre><p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.3">An example is</p>
1506            <div id="rfc.figure.u.35"></div><pre class="text">     Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="fname.ext"
1507</pre><p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.5">The receiving user agent <em class="bcp14">SHOULD NOT</em> respect any directory path information present in the filename-parm parameter, which is the only parameter believed to apply
1508               to HTTP implementations at this time. The filename <em class="bcp14">SHOULD</em> be treated as a terminal component only.
1509            </p>
1510            <p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.6">If this header is used in a response with the application/octet-stream content-type, the implied suggestion is that the user
1511               agent should not display the response, but directly enter a `save response as...' dialog.
1512            </p>
1513            <p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.7">See <a href="#content-disposition.issues" title="Content-Disposition Issues">Section&nbsp;7.2</a> for Content-Disposition security issues.
1514            </p>
1515         </div>
1516      </div>
1517      <div id="compatibility">
1518         <h1 id="rfc.section.C"><a href="#rfc.section.C">C.</a>&nbsp;<a href="#compatibility">Compatibility with Previous Versions</a></h1>
1519         <div id="changes.from.rfc.2068">
1520            <h2 id="rfc.section.C.1"><a href="#rfc.section.C.1">C.1</a>&nbsp;<a href="#changes.from.rfc.2068">Changes from RFC 2068</a></h2>
1521            <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.1">Transfer-coding and message lengths all interact in ways that required fixing exactly when chunked encoding is used (to allow
1522               for transfer encoding that may not be self delimiting); it was important to straighten out exactly how message lengths are
1523               computed. (<a href="#entity.length" title="Entity Length">Section&nbsp;3.2.2</a>, see also <a href="#Part1" id="rfc.xref.Part1.5"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 1: URIs, Connections, and Message Parsing">[Part1]</cite></a>, <a href="#Part5" id="rfc.xref.Part5.3"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 5: Range Requests and Partial Responses">[Part5]</cite></a> and <a href="#Part6" id="rfc.xref.Part6.4"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 6: Caching">[Part6]</cite></a>).
1524            </p>
1525            <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.2">Charset wildcarding is introduced to avoid explosion of character set names in accept headers. (<a href="#header.accept-charset" id="rfc.xref.header.accept-charset.2" title="Accept-Charset">Section&nbsp;5.2</a>)
1526            </p>
1527            <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.3">Content-Base was deleted from the specification: it was not implemented widely, and there is no simple, safe way to introduce
1528               it without a robust extension mechanism. In addition, it is used in a similar, but not identical fashion in MHTML <a href="#RFC2557" id="rfc.xref.RFC2557.2"><cite title="MIME Encapsulation of Aggregate Documents, such as HTML (MHTML)">[RFC2557]</cite></a>.
1529            </p>
1530            <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.4">A content-coding of "identity" was introduced, to solve problems discovered in caching. (<a href="#content.codings" title="Content Codings">Section&nbsp;2.2</a>)
1531            </p>
1532            <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.5">Quality Values of zero should indicate that "I don't want something" to allow clients to refuse a representation. (<a href="#quality.values" title="Quality Values">Section&nbsp;2.4</a>)
1533            </p>
1534            <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.6">The Alternates<span id="rfc.iref.a.5"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.11"></span>, Content-Version<span id="rfc.iref.c.8"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.12"></span>, Derived-From<span id="rfc.iref.d.2"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.13"></span>, Link<span id="rfc.iref.l.1"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.14"></span>, URI<span id="rfc.iref.u.1"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.15"></span>, Public<span id="rfc.iref.p.1"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.16"></span> and Content-Base<span id="rfc.iref.c.9"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.17"></span> header fields were defined in previous versions of this specification, but not commonly implemented. See <a href="#RFC2068" id="rfc.xref.RFC2068.5"><cite title="Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1">[RFC2068]</cite></a>.
1535            </p>
1536         </div>
1537         <div id="changes.from.rfc.2616">
1538            <h2 id="rfc.section.C.2"><a href="#rfc.section.C.2">C.2</a>&nbsp;<a href="#changes.from.rfc.2616">Changes from RFC 2616</a></h2>
1539            <p id="rfc.section.C.2.p.1">Clarify contexts that charset is used in. (<a href="#character.sets" title="Character Sets">Section&nbsp;2.1</a>)
1540            </p>
1541            <p id="rfc.section.C.2.p.2">Remove reference to non-existant identity transfer-coding value tokens. (<a href="#no.content-transfer-encoding" title="No Content-Transfer-Encoding">Appendix&nbsp;A.4</a>)
1542            </p>
1543         </div>
1544      </div>
1545      <div>
1546         <h1 id="rfc.section.D"><a href="#rfc.section.D">D.</a>&nbsp;Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)
1547         </h1>
1548         <div>
1549            <h2 id="rfc.section.D.1"><a href="#rfc.section.D.1">D.1</a>&nbsp;Since RFC2616
1550            </h2>
1551            <p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.1">Extracted relevant partitions from <a href="#RFC2616" id="rfc.xref.RFC2616.2"><cite title="Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1">[RFC2616]</cite></a>.
1552            </p>
1553         </div>
1554         <div>
1555            <h2 id="rfc.section.D.2"><a href="#rfc.section.D.2">D.2</a>&nbsp;Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-00
1556            </h2>
1557            <p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.1">Closed issues: </p>
1558            <ul>
1559               <li>&lt;<a href="http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/8">http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/8</a>&gt;: "Media Type Registrations" (&lt;<a href="http://purl.org/NET/http-errata#media-reg">http://purl.org/NET/http-errata#media-reg</a>&gt;)
1560               </li>
1561               <li>&lt;<a href="http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/14">http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/14</a>&gt;: "Clarification regarding quoting of charset values" (&lt;<a href="http://purl.org/NET/http-errata#charactersets">http://purl.org/NET/http-errata#charactersets</a>&gt;)
1562               </li>
1563               <li>&lt;<a href="http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/16">http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/16</a>&gt;: "Remove 'identity' token references" (&lt;<a href="http://purl.org/NET/http-errata#identity">http://purl.org/NET/http-errata#identity</a>&gt;)
1564               </li>
1565               <li>&lt;<a href="http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/25">http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/25</a>&gt;: "Accept-Encoding BNF"
1566               </li>
1567               <li>&lt;<a href="http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/35">http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/35</a>&gt;: "Normative and Informative references"
1568               </li>
1569               <li>&lt;<a href="http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/46">http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/46</a>&gt;: "RFC1700 references"
1570               </li>
1571               <li>&lt;<a href="http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/65">http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/65</a>&gt;: "Informative references"
1572               </li>
1573               <li>&lt;<a href="http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/66">http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/66</a>&gt;: "ISO-8859-1 Reference"
1574               </li>
1575               <li>&lt;<a href="http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/68">http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/68</a>&gt;: "Encoding References Normative"
1576               </li>
1577               <li>&lt;<a href="http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/86">http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/86</a>&gt;: "Normative up-to-date references"
1578               </li>
1579            </ul>
1580         </div>
1581      </div>
1582      <h1 id="rfc.index"><a href="#rfc.index">Index</a></h1>
1583      <p class="noprint"><a href="#rfc.index.A">A</a> <a href="#rfc.index.C">C</a> <a href="#rfc.index.D">D</a> <a href="#rfc.index.G">G</a> <a href="#rfc.index.H">H</a> <a href="#rfc.index.I">I</a> <a href="#rfc.index.L">L</a> <a href="#rfc.index.P">P</a> <a href="#rfc.index.R">R</a> <a href="#rfc.index.U">U</a>
1584      </p>
1585      <div class="print2col">
1586         <ul class="ind">
1587            <li><a id="rfc.index.A" href="#rfc.index.A"><b>A</b></a><ul>
1588                  <li>Accept header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept.1">2.3</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept.2">4.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.a.1"><b>5.1</b></a></li>
1589                  <li>Accept-Charset header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept-charset.1">4.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.a.2"><b>5.2</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept-charset.2">C.1</a></li>
1590                  <li>Accept-Encoding header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept-encoding.1">2.2</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept-encoding.2">4.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.a.3"><b>5.3</b></a></li>
1591                  <li>Accept-Language header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept-language.1">4.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.a.4"><b>5.4</b></a></li>
1592                  <li>Alternates header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.a.5"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1593               </ul>
1594            </li>
1595            <li><a id="rfc.index.C" href="#rfc.index.C"><b>C</b></a><ul>
1596                  <li>compress&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.c.1">2.2</a></li>
1597                  <li>Content-Base header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.c.9"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1598                  <li>Content-Disposition header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.content-disposition.1">7.2</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.c.7"><b>B.1</b></a></li>
1599                  <li>Content-Encoding header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-encoding.1">2.2</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-encoding.2">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.c.2"><b>5.5</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-encoding.3">5.5</a></li>
1600                  <li>Content-Language header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-language.1">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.c.3"><b>5.6</b></a></li>
1601                  <li>Content-Location header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-location.1">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.c.4"><b>5.7</b></a></li>
1602                  <li>Content-MD5 header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-md5.1">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.c.5"><b>5.8</b></a></li>
1603                  <li>Content-Type header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-type.1">2.3</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-type.2">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.c.6"><b>5.9</b></a></li>
1604                  <li>Content-Version header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.c.8"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1605               </ul>
1606            </li>
1607            <li><a id="rfc.index.D" href="#rfc.index.D"><b>D</b></a><ul>
1608                  <li>deflate&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.d.1">2.2</a></li>
1609                  <li>Derived-From header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.d.2"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1610               </ul>
1611            </li>
1612            <li><a id="rfc.index.G" href="#rfc.index.G"><b>G</b></a><ul>
1613                  <li><tt>Grammar</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;
1614                     <ul>
1615                        <li><tt>Accept</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.17"><b>5.1</b></a></li>
1616                        <li><tt>Accept-Charset</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.21"><b>5.2</b></a></li>
1617                        <li><tt>Accept-Encoding</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.22"><b>5.3</b></a></li>
1618                        <li><tt>accept-extension</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.20"><b>5.1</b></a></li>
1619                        <li><tt>Accept-Language</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.24"><b>5.4</b></a></li>
1620                        <li><tt>accept-params</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.19"><b>5.1</b></a></li>
1621                        <li><tt>attribute</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.8"><b>2.3</b></a></li>
1622                        <li><tt>charset</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.1"><b>2.1</b></a></li>
1623                        <li><tt>codings</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.23"><b>5.3</b></a></li>
1624                        <li><tt>content-coding</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.2"><b>2.2</b></a></li>
1625                        <li><tt>content-disposition</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.33"><b>B.1</b></a></li>
1626                        <li><tt>Content-Encoding</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.26"><b>5.5</b></a></li>
1627                        <li><tt>Content-Language</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.27"><b>5.6</b></a></li>
1628                        <li><tt>Content-Location</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.28"><b>5.7</b></a></li>
1629                        <li><tt>Content-MD5</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.29"><b>5.8</b></a></li>
1630                        <li><tt>Content-Type</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.31"><b>5.9</b></a></li>
1631                        <li><tt>disp-extension-parm</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.38"><b>B.1</b></a></li>
1632                        <li><tt>disp-extension-token</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.37"><b>B.1</b></a></li>
1633                        <li><tt>disposition-parm</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.35"><b>B.1</b></a></li>
1634                        <li><tt>disposition-type</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.34"><b>B.1</b></a></li>
1635                        <li><tt>entity-body</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.16"><b>3.2</b></a></li>
1636                        <li><tt>entity-header</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.14"><b>3.1</b></a></li>
1637                        <li><tt>extension-header</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.15"><b>3.1</b></a></li>
1638                        <li><tt>filename-parm</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.36"><b>B.1</b></a></li>
1639                        <li><tt>language-range</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.25"><b>5.4</b></a></li>
1640                        <li><tt>language-tag</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.11"><b>2.5</b></a></li>
1641                        <li><tt>md5-digest</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.30"><b>5.8</b></a></li>
1642                        <li><tt>media-range</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.18"><b>5.1</b></a></li>
1643                        <li><tt>media-type</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.4"><b>2.3</b></a></li>
1644                        <li><tt>MIME-Version</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.32"><b>A.1</b></a></li>
1645                        <li><tt>parameter</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.7"><b>2.3</b></a></li>
1646                        <li><tt>primary-tag</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.12"><b>2.5</b></a></li>
1647                        <li><tt>qvalue</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.10"><b>2.4</b></a></li>
1648                        <li><tt>subtag</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.13"><b>2.5</b></a></li>
1649                        <li><tt>subtype</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.6"><b>2.3</b></a></li>
1650                        <li><tt>type</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.5"><b>2.3</b></a></li>
1651                        <li><tt>value</tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.9"><b>2.3</b></a></li>
1652                     </ul>
1653                  </li>
1654                  <li>gzip&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.g.3">2.2</a></li>
1655               </ul>
1656            </li>
1657            <li><a id="rfc.index.H" href="#rfc.index.H"><b>H</b></a><ul>
1658                  <li>Headers&nbsp;&nbsp;
1659                     <ul>
1660                        <li>Accept&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept.1">2.3</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept.2">4.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.h.1"><b>5.1</b></a></li>
1661                        <li>Accept-Charset&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept-charset.1">4.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.h.2"><b>5.2</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept-charset.2">C.1</a></li>
1662                        <li>Accept-Encoding&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept-encoding.1">2.2</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept-encoding.2">4.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.h.3"><b>5.3</b></a></li>
1663                        <li>Accept-Language&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.accept-language.1">4.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.h.4"><b>5.4</b></a></li>
1664                        <li>Alternate&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.h.11"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1665                        <li>Content-Base&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.h.17"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1666                        <li>Content-Disposition&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.content-disposition.1">7.2</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.h.10"><b>B.1</b></a></li>
1667                        <li>Content-Encoding&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-encoding.1">2.2</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-encoding.2">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.h.5"><b>5.5</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-encoding.3">5.5</a></li>
1668                        <li>Content-Language&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-language.1">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.h.6"><b>5.6</b></a></li>
1669                        <li>Content-Location&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-location.1">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.h.7"><b>5.7</b></a></li>
1670                        <li>Content-MD5&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-md5.1">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.h.8"><b>5.8</b></a></li>
1671                        <li>Content-Type&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-type.1">2.3</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.header.content-type.2">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.iref.h.9"><b>5.9</b></a></li>
1672                        <li>Content-Version&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.h.12"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1673                        <li>Derived-From&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.h.13"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1674                        <li>Link&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.h.14"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1675                        <li>Public&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.h.16"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1676                        <li>URI&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.h.15"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1677                     </ul>
1678                  </li>
1679               </ul>
1680            </li>
1681            <li><a id="rfc.index.I" href="#rfc.index.I"><b>I</b></a><ul>
1682                  <li>identity&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.i.1">2.2</a></li>
1683                  <li><em>ISO-8859-1</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.ISO-8859-1.1">2.1.1</a>, <a href="#ISO-8859-1"><b>9.1</b></a></li>
1684               </ul>
1685            </li>
1686            <li><a id="rfc.index.L" href="#rfc.index.L"><b>L</b></a><ul>
1687                  <li>Link header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.l.1"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1688               </ul>
1689            </li>
1690            <li><a id="rfc.index.P" href="#rfc.index.P"><b>P</b></a><ul>
1691                  <li><em>Part1</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part1.1">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.Part1.2">3.2</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.Part1.3">3.2.2</a>, <a href="#Part1"><b>9.1</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.Part1.4">A.5</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.Part1.5">C.1</a><ul>
1692                        <li><em>Section 4.3</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part1.2">3.2</a></li>
1693                        <li><em>Section 4.4</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part1.3">3.2.2</a></li>
1694                        <li><em>Section 8.2</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part1.1">3.1</a></li>
1695                        <li><em>Section 8.7</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part1.4">A.5</a></li>
1696                     </ul>
1697                  </li>
1698                  <li><em>Part2</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part2.1">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.Part2.2">4.1</a>, <a href="#Part2"><b>9.1</b></a><ul>
1699                        <li><em>Section 10.1</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part2.1">3.1</a></li>
1700                        <li><em>Section 10.9</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part2.2">4.1</a></li>
1701                     </ul>
1702                  </li>
1703                  <li><em>Part4</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part4.1">3.1</a>, <a href="#Part4"><b>9.1</b></a><ul>
1704                        <li><em>Section 6.6</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part4.1">3.1</a></li>
1705                     </ul>
1706                  </li>
1707                  <li><em>Part5</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part5.1">2.3.2</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.Part5.2">3.1</a>, <a href="#Part5"><b>9.1</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.Part5.3">C.1</a><ul>
1708                        <li><em>Section 5.2</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part5.2">3.1</a></li>
1709                        <li><em>Appendix A</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part5.1">2.3.2</a></li>
1710                     </ul>
1711                  </li>
1712                  <li><em>Part6</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part6.1">3.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.Part6.2">4.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.Part6.3">5.7</a>, <a href="#Part6"><b>9.1</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.Part6.4">C.1</a><ul>
1713                        <li><em>Section 7</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part6.3">5.7</a></li>
1714                        <li><em>Section 15.3</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part6.1">3.1</a></li>
1715                        <li><em>Section 15.5</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.Part6.2">4.1</a></li>
1716                     </ul>
1717                  </li>
1718                  <li>Public header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.p.1"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1719               </ul>
1720            </li>
1721            <li><a id="rfc.index.R" href="#rfc.index.R"><b>R</b></a><ul>
1722                  <li><em>RFC1766</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC1766.1">2.5</a>, <a href="#RFC1766"><b>9.1</b></a></li>
1723                  <li><em>RFC1806</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC1806.1">7.2</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC1806.2">7.2</a>, <a href="#RFC1806"><b>9.2</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC1806.3">B.1</a></li>
1724                  <li><em>RFC1864</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC1864.1">5.8</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC1864.2">5.8</a>, <a href="#RFC1864"><b>9.1</b></a></li>
1725                  <li><em>RFC1945</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#RFC1945"><b>9.2</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC1945.1">B</a></li>
1726                  <li><em>RFC1950</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC1950.1">2.2</a>, <a href="#RFC1950"><b>9.1</b></a></li>
1727                  <li><em>RFC1951</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC1951.1">2.2</a>, <a href="#RFC1951"><b>9.1</b></a></li>
1728                  <li><em>RFC1952</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC1952.1">2.2</a>, <a href="#RFC1952"><b>9.1</b></a></li>
1729                  <li><em>RFC2045</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#RFC2045"><b>9.1</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2045.1">A</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2045.2">A.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2045.3">A.2</a></li>
1730                  <li><em>RFC2046</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2046.1">2.3</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2046.2">2.3.2</a>, <a href="#RFC2046"><b>9.1</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2046.3">A.2</a><ul>
1731                        <li><em>Section 5.1.1</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2046.2">2.3.2</a></li>
1732                     </ul>
1733                  </li>
1734                  <li><em>RFC2049</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#RFC2049"><b>9.2</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2049.1">A.2</a><ul>
1735                        <li><em>Section 4</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2049.1">A.2</a></li>
1736                     </ul>
1737                  </li>
1738                  <li><em>RFC2068</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2068.1">9.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2068.2">9.1</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2068.3">9.1</a>, <a href="#RFC2068"><b>9.2</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2068.4">B</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2068.5">C.1</a></li>
1739                  <li><em>RFC2076</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#RFC2076"><b>9.2</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2076.1">B</a></li>
1740                  <li><em>RFC2119</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2119.1">1.1</a>, <a href="#RFC2119"><b>9.1</b></a></li>
1741                  <li><em>RFC2183</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2183.1">7.2</a>, <a href="#RFC2183"><b>9.2</b></a></li>
1742                  <li><em>RFC2277</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2277.1">2.1</a>, <a href="#RFC2277"><b>9.2</b></a></li>
1743                  <li><em>RFC2388</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2388.1">2.3.2</a>, <a href="#RFC2388"><b>9.2</b></a></li>
1744                  <li><em>RFC2557</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#RFC2557"><b>9.2</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2557.1">A.6</a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2557.2">C.1</a></li>
1745                  <li><em>RFC2616</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2616.1">1</a>, <a href="#RFC2616"><b>9.2</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2616.2">D.1</a></li>
1746                  <li><em>RFC2822</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#RFC2822"><b>9.2</b></a>, <a href="#rfc.xref.RFC2822.1">A</a></li>
1747                  <li><em>RFC3629</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC3629.1">2.1</a>, <a href="#RFC3629"><b>9.2</b></a></li>
1748                  <li><em>RFC4288</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.xref.RFC4288.1">2.3</a>, <a href="#RFC4288"><b>9.1</b></a></li>
1749               </ul>
1750            </li>
1751            <li><a id="rfc.index.U" href="#rfc.index.U"><b>U</b></a><ul>
1752                  <li>URI header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#rfc.iref.u.1"><b>C.1</b></a></li>
1753               </ul>
1754            </li>
1755         </ul>
1756      </div>
1757      <div class="avoidbreak">
1758         <h1 id="rfc.authors"><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></h1>
1759         <p><b>Roy T. Fielding</b>
1760            (editor)
1761            <br>Day Software<br>23 Corporate Plaza DR, Suite 280<br>Newport Beach, CA&nbsp;92660<br>USA<br>Phone: <a href="tel:+1-949-706-5300">+1-949-706-5300</a><br>Fax: <a href="fax:+1-949-706-5305">+1-949-706-5305</a><br>EMail: <a href="mailto:fielding@gbiv.com">fielding@gbiv.com</a><br>URI: <a href="http://roy.gbiv.com/">http://roy.gbiv.com/</a></p>
1762         <p><b>Jim Gettys</b><br>One Laptop per Child<br>21 Oak Knoll Road<br>Carlisle, MA&nbsp;01741<br>USA<br>EMail: <a href="mailto:jg@laptop.org">jg@laptop.org</a><br>URI: <a href="http://www.laptop.org/">http://www.laptop.org/</a></p>
1763         <p><b>Jeffrey C. Mogul</b><br>Hewlett-Packard Company<br>HP Labs, Large Scale Systems Group<br>1501 Page Mill Road, MS 1177<br>Palo Alto, CA&nbsp;94304<br>USA<br>EMail: <a href="mailto:JeffMogul@acm.org">JeffMogul@acm.org</a></p>
1764         <p><b>Henrik Frystyk Nielsen</b><br>Microsoft Corporation<br>1 Microsoft Way<br>Redmond, WA&nbsp;98052<br>USA<br>EMail: <a href="mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com">henrikn@microsoft.com</a></p>
1765         <p><b>Larry Masinter</b><br>Adobe Systems, Incorporated<br>345 Park Ave<br>San Jose, CA&nbsp;95110<br>USA<br>EMail: <a href="mailto:LMM@acm.org">LMM@acm.org</a><br>URI: <a href="http://larry.masinter.net/">http://larry.masinter.net/</a></p>
1766         <p><b>Paul J. Leach</b><br>Microsoft Corporation<br>1 Microsoft Way<br>Redmond, WA&nbsp;98052<br>EMail: <a href="mailto:paulle@microsoft.com">paulle@microsoft.com</a></p>
1767         <p><b>Tim Berners-Lee</b><br>World Wide Web Consortium<br>MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory<br>The Stata Center, Building 32<br>32 Vassar Street<br>Cambridge, MA&nbsp;02139<br>USA<br>EMail: <a href="mailto:timbl@w3.org">timbl@w3.org</a><br>URI: <a href="http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/">http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/</a></p>
1768         <p><b>Yves Lafon</b>
1769            (editor)
1770            <br>World Wide Web Consortium<br>W3C / ERCIM<br>2004, rte des Lucioles<br>Sophia-Antipolis, AM&nbsp;06902<br>France<br>EMail: <a href="mailto:ylafon@w3.org">ylafon@w3.org</a><br>URI: <a href="http://www.raubacapeu.net/people/yves/">http://www.raubacapeu.net/people/yves/</a></p>
1771         <p><b>Julian F. Reschke</b>
1772            (editor)
1773            <br>greenbytes GmbH<br>Hafenweg 16<br>Muenster, NW&nbsp;48155<br>Germany<br>Phone: <a href="tel:+492512807760">+49 251 2807760</a><br>Fax: <a href="fax:+492512807761">+49 251 2807761</a><br>EMail: <a href="mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de">julian.reschke@greenbytes.de</a><br>URI: <a href="http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/">http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/</a></p>
1774      </div>
1775      <div id="rfc.copyright">
1776         <h1><a href="#rfc.copyright">Full Copyright Statement</a></h1>
1777         <p>Copyright © The IETF Trust (2008).</p>
1778         <p>This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the
1779            authors retain all their rights.
1780         </p>
1781         <p>This document and the information contained herein are provided on an “AS IS” basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION
1782            HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE
1783            DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN
1784            WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
1785         </p>
1786      </div>
1787      <div id="rfc.ipr">
1788         <h1><a href="#rfc.ipr">Intellectual Property</a></h1>
1789         <p>The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might
1790            be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any
1791            license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to
1792            identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and
1793            BCP 79.
1794         </p>
1795         <p>Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result
1796            of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users
1797            of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at <a href="http://www.ietf.org/ipr">http://www.ietf.org/ipr</a>.
1798         </p>
1799         <p>The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
1800            rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF
1801            at <a href="mailto:ietf-ipr@ietf.org">ietf-ipr@ietf.org</a>.
1802         </p>
1803      </div>
1804   </body>
1805</html>
Note: See TracBrowser for help on using the repository browser.