- From: Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 13:57:46 +0100
- To: Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Ilya Grigorik <ilya@igvita.com>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
I make another attempt, based on the feedback (Kazuho, please stop me if you prefer to work on this):
Cache-Digest = "Cache-Digest" ":" #digest-value
digest-value = base64url-encoded-digest *( ";" digest-param )
digest-param = name "=" value
name = token
value = token | quoted-string
base64url-encoded-digest is the binary output of the cache digest codec,
encoded as a base64url string (that is, the URL- and filename-safe
Base64 encoding described in Section 5 of [RFC4648], with any trailing
'=' characters omitted).
The following digest parameter are defined:
"domain" value is authority, as defined in RFC3986, or
wildcard-identifiers, as defined in RFC 6125 6.4.3.
The implicit default for the domain value is "*".
"path" value is a path-absolute, as defined in RFC3986 3.3.
The implicit default for the path value is "/".
"codec" the identifier of the algorithm used to calculate
the cache digest.
The implicit default for codec is "GCS-SHA256".
Digest from a Cache-Digest header always replace any matching
existing digests. Multiple digests in one request are additive. This
allows additions to earlier digests in a form, which can be
beneficial when using HTTP/2 header compression.
A digest replaces any existing digest if its domain parameter
matches the domain of an existing digest (with '*' matching any
domain) and the path parameter is a prefix of or equal to the
existing path.
If the codec of a digest is unknown, the digest MUST be assumed
to be empty and SHOULD replace any matching existing digests.
A candidate of a server push is matched against a cache digest
by comparing its :authority against the digest domain (port number?)
and its :path against the digest path (equal or prefix). Only
then is the candidate matched against the digest content.
> Am 18.01.2016 um 15:46 schrieb Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>:
>
> 2016-01-18 19:32 GMT+09:00 Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>:
>> On 2016-01-18 11:19, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 generic header parameter form.
>>>
>>> If I may make a proposal:
>>>
>>> Cache-Digest = "Cache-Digest" ":" #digest-value
>>> digest-value = "<" base64url encoded digest ">" *( ";" digest-param
>>> )
>>> digest-param = ( ( "domain" "=" domain-value )
>>> | ( "path" "=" path-value )
>>> | ( "codec" "=" codec-value )
>>> | ( "update" ( "=" update-param ) )
>>> | ( digest-extension ) )
>>>
>>> digest-extension = ( parmname [ "=" ( ptoken | quoted-string ) ] )
>>>
>>> domain-value =
>>> authority # defined in RFC3986
>>> | wildcard-identifier # defined in RFC 6125 6.4.3
>>>
>>> path-value = path-absolute # defined in RFC3986 3.3
>>>
>>> codec = ( "GCS-SHA256" | ( ptoken | quoted-string ) )
>>> ...
>>
>>
>> I wouldn't use angle brackets here; let's leave them for use in places where
>> the value is a URI (Link header field and several WebDAV header fields).
>>
>> Just us token/quoted-sting here.
>>
>> Also, do not wire parameter names into the ABNF; this mixes syntax with
>> semantics.
>
> Thank you for the advice.
>
> Obviously I have used an old-fashioned RFC as a reference when writing
> the ABNF (that Stefan probably modified). I should have looked into a
> newer one, such as the Alt-Svc draft.
>
>> Best regards, Julian
>
>
>
> --
> Kazuho Oku
>
Received on Wednesday, 20 January 2016 12:58:16 UTC