Committed to connecting the world

  •  

ITU-T work programme

Home : ITU-T Home : ITU-T Work Programme : F.748.49     
  ITU-T A.5 justification information for referenced document IETF RFC 9112 (2022) in draft F.748.49
1. Clear description of the referenced document:
Name: IETF RFC 9112 (2022)
Title: HTTP/1.1
2. Status of approval:
Standards track document - Proposed Standard approved June 2022. Also known as STD 99.
3. Justification for the specific reference:
The reference points Am, Sa, Cs, and Ac used hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) defined in [IETF RFC 9112].
4. Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?draft=&rfc=9112&doctitle=&group=&holder=&iprtitle=&patent=&submit=rfc
5. Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
RFC 9112 was published in June 2022 and is a standards track RFC. It is largely used for World Wide Web service and related Web Browsers.
6. The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
The concepts in this document is sufficiently stable for our use. Errata exist. Obsoletes RFC 7230.
7. Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
RFC 9112 obsoletes RFC 7230.
8. Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
a) Normative References/
[CACHING] Fielding, R., Ed., Nottingham, M., Ed., and J. Reschke, Ed., "HTTP Caching", STD 98, RFC 9111, DOI 10.17487/RFC9111, June 2022, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9111./
[HTTP] Fielding, R., Ed., Nottingham, M., Ed., and J. Reschke, Ed., "HTTP Semantics", STD 97, RFC 9110, DOI 10.17487/RFC9110, June 2022, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9110./
[RFC1950] Deutsch, P. and J-L. Gailly, "ZLIB Compressed Data Format Specification version 3.3", RFC 1950, DOI 10.17487/RFC1950, May 1996, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1950./
[RFC1951] Deutsch, P., "DEFLATE Compressed Data Format Specification version 1.3", RFC 1951, DOI 10.17487/RFC1951, May 1996, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1951./
[RFC1952] Deutsch, P., "GZIP file format specification version 4.3", RFC 1952, DOI 10.17487/RFC1952, May 1996, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1952./
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119./
[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234./
[RFC7405] Kyzivat, P., "Case-Sensitive String Support in ABNF", RFC 7405, DOI 10.17487/RFC7405, December 2014, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7405./
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174./
[TLS13] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446./
[URI] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986./
[USASCII] American National Standards Institute, "Coded Character Set -- 7-bit American Standard Code for Information Interchange", ANSI X3.4, 1986./
[Welch] Welch, T., "A Technique for High-Performance Data Compression", IEEE Computer 17(6), DOI 10.1109/MC.1984.1659158, June 1984, https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1659158/./
b) Informative References /
[HTTP/1.0] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and H. Frystyk, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.0", RFC 1945, DOI 10.17487/RFC1945, May 1996, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1945./
[Klein] Klein, A., "Divide and Conquer - HTTP Response Splitting, Web Cache Poisoning Attacks, and Related Topics", March 2004, https://packetstormsecurity.com/papers/general/ whitepaper_httpresponse.pdf./
[Linhart] Linhart, C., Klein, A., Heled, R., and S. Orrin, "HTTP Request Smuggling", June 2005, https://www.cgisecurity.com/lib/HTTP-Request- Smuggling.pdf./
[RFC2045] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies", RFC 2045, DOI 10.17487/RFC2045, November 1996, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2045./
[RFC2046] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046, DOI 10.17487/RFC2046, November 1996, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2046./
[RFC2049] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Five: Conformance Criteria and Examples", RFC 2049, DOI 10.17487/RFC2049, November 1996, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2049./
[RFC2068] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2068, DOI 10.17487/RFC2068, January 1997, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2068./
[RFC2557] Palme, J., Hopmann, A., and N. Shelness, "MIME Encapsulation of Aggregate Documents, such as HTML (MHTML)", RFC 2557, DOI 10.17487/RFC2557, March 1999, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2557./
[RFC5322] Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322, DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5322./
[RFC7230] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing", RFC 7230, DOI 10.17487/RFC7230, June 2014, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7230./
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126.
9. Qualification of ISOC/IETF:
9.1-9.6     Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7     The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8     Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
10. Other (for any supplementary information):
None.
Note: This form is based on Recommendation ITU-T A.5