view Side-By-Side changes
Network Working Group G. Klyne Internet-Draft MIMEsweeper Group Expires: July5,30, 2002 M. Nottingham J. Mogul Compaq WRL Jan4,29, 2002 Registration procedures for message headersdraft-klyne-msghdr-registry-01draft-klyne-msghdr-registry-02 Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on July5,30, 2002. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. Abstract This specification defines registration procedures for the message headers used by Internet mail,newsgroup feeds, HTTPHTTP, news and otherInternetapplications. Discussion of this document Please send comments to <ietf-822@imc.org>. To subscribe to this list, send a message with the body 'subscribe' to <ietf-822- request@imc.org>.KlyneKlyne, et al. Expires July5,30, 2002 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1 Structure of this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34 1.2 Document terminology and conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Message headers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1 Standard and non-standard headers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2 Definitions of message headers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2.1 Application-specific message headers . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Registration procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 3.1 Header specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2 Registration templates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67 3.2.1 Normative header template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67 3.2.2 Provisional header template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.3 Submission of registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.4 Change control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.5 Comments on header definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .89 3.6 Location of message header registry . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.Initial registrationsIANA considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.IANASecurity considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .9 6.Security considerations . . . .Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 7. Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . 10 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 References. . . . . . . . . . . 10 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 Author's Address. . . . . . . 13 A. Revision history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 A. Revision history. . . . . . . 14 A.1 draft-klyne-msghdr-registry-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 A.114 A.2 draft-klyne-msghdr-registry-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 A.214 A.3 draft-klyne-msghdr-registry-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1215 B. Todo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1215 Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Klyne16 Klyne, et al. Expires July5,30, 2002 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 1. Introduction This specification defines registration procedures for the message headers used by Internet mail, HTTP, newsgroupfeeds, HTTPfeeds and other Internet applications. Benefits of a central registry for message headers include: oto provideproviding a single point of reference for standardized headers; oto provideproviding a central point of discovery for established headers, and easy location of their defining documents; oto discouragediscouraging multiple definitions of a header name for different purposes; oto helphelping those proposing new headers discern established trends and conventions, and avoid names that might be confused with existing ones; oto encourageencouraging convergence of header name usage across multiple applications/protocols. The primary specification for Internet message headers in email is the Internet mail message format specification, RFC 2822[22], but there[34]. HTTP/1.0 [7] and HTTP/1.1 [28] define message headers (respectively, the HTTP-header and message-header protocol elements) for use with HTTP. These specifications also define a number of headers, and and provide for extension through the use of new field-names. There are many other Internet standards track documents that define additional headers for use within the samenamespace,namespaces, notably MIME[7][8] and related specifications. Other Internet applications that use MIME, such as newsgroup feeds (RFC 1036 [1])and HTTP web access (RFC 2616 [19]),may also use many of the same headers. Although in principle each application defines its own set of valid headers, exchange of messages between applications (e.g. mail to news gateways), common use of MIME encapsulation, and the possibility of common processing for various message types (e.g. a common message archive and retrieval facility) makes it desirable to have a single point of reference for standardized and proposed headers. Listing headers together reduces the chance of an accidental collision, and helps implementers find relevant information. The message headerregistryregistries defined hereservesserve that purpose. Klyne, et al. Expires July 30, 2002 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 1.1 Structure of this document Section Section 2 discusses the purpose of this specification, and indicates some sources of information about defined message headers. Section Section 3 defines the message header registry, and sets out requirements and procedures for creating entries in it.Klyne Expires July 5, 2002 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 20021.2 Document terminology and conventions The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119[10].[14]. NOTE: indented comments like this provide additional nonessential information about the rationale behind this document. [[[Editorial comments and questions about outstanding issues are provided in triple brackets like this. These working comments should be resolved and removed prior to final publication.]]] 2. Message headers 2.1 Standard and non-standard headers Many message headers are defined in standards-track documents, which means they have been subjected to a process of community review and achieved consensus that they provide a useful and well-founded capability. Many other headers have been defined and adoptedfor private use;ad-hoc to address a locally occurring requirement; some of these have found widespread use. Theregistryregistries defined hereisare intended to cater for all of these headers, while maintaining a clear distinction and status for those which have community consensus. To this end,the registry is defined intwoparts (or maybe as two separate registries):registries are defined: o Normative Message Headers, intended for headers defined in IETF standards-track documents, or those that have achieved a comparable level of community review. The assignment policy for such registration is "IETF Consensus", as defined by RFC 2434[18].[26]. o Provisional Message Headers, intended for any header proposed by any developer, without making any claim about the usefulness quality of its definition. The assignment policy for registration of these is "Private Use", per RFC 2434[18].[26]. Klyne, et al. Expires July 30, 2002 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 Neither registry tracks the syntax, semantics or type of field- values. Only the field-names and applicable protocols are registered; all other details are specified in the defining documents referenced by registry entries. Significant updates to such references (e.g., the replacement of a Proposed Standard RFC by a Draft Standard RFC, but not the revision of an Internet-Draft) SHOULD be accompanied by updates to the corresponding registry entries. Note that there exist at least two other sources information about message headers: o RFC 2076[8],[11], as updated[25],[40], contains a list of commonly used message headers, and o Dan Bernstein maintains a list of standard and non-standard mail message headers[26]. Klyne Expires July 5, 2002 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002[41]. 2.2 Definitions of message headers RFC 2822[22][34] defines a general syntax forInternetmessageheaders. Itheaders, and also defines a number of headers for use with Internet mail. HTTP/1.0 [7] and HTTP/1.1 [28] do likewise for HTTP. Additional header names are defined in a variety of standards-track RFC documents, including: RFC 1036 [1], RFC 1496 [2], RFC 1505 [3], RFC 1766 [5], RFC 1864 [6], RFC 2156[12],[16], RFC 2183[13],[17], RFC 2045[7],[8], RFC 2046 [8], RFC 2109 [12] (obsoleted by RFC 2965), RFC 2110[9],[13], RFC 2227 [18], RFC 2298[14],[20], RFC 2369[15],[23], RFC 2421[17],[25], RFC2616 [19],2518 [27], RFC 2617 [29], RFC 2821[21],[33], RFC 2912[23] and[36], RFC 2919[24].[37], and RFC 2965 [38]. 2.2.1 Application-specific message headers Internet applications that use message headers include Internet mail[21][22],[33][34], NNTP newsgroup feeds [1], HTTP web access[19][28] and any other that uses MIME[7][8] encapsulation of message content. In some cases (notably HTTP[19]),[28]), the header syntax and usage is redefined for the specific application. This registration is concerned only with the allocation and specification of header names, and not with the details of header implementation in specific protocols. In some cases, the same header name may be specified differently (by different documents) for use with different applicationprotocols [[[example?]]].protocols; e.g. The Date: header used with HTTP has a different syntax than the Date: header used with Internet mail. In other cases, a header name may have a common specification across multiple protocols (ignoring protocol-specific lexical and character set conventions); e.g. this Klyne, et al. Expires July 30, 2002 [Page 5] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 is generally the case for MIME headers with names of the form 'Content-*'. Thus, we need to accommodate application-specific headers, whilerecognizing thewishing to recognize and promote (where appropriate) commonality of other headers across multiple applications. Common registries are used for all applications, and each registered header specifies the applicationprotocol(s)protocol for which the registered definition applies. A given header name may have multiple registry entries for different protocols; in the Normative Message Headers registry, a given header name may be registered only once for any given protocol. 3. Registration procedure The procedure for registering a message header is: 1. Construct a header specification 2. Prepare a registration template 3. Submit the registration templateKlyne Expires July 5, 2002 [Page 5] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 20023.1 Header specification Registration of a new message header starts with construction of a proposal that describes the syntax, semantics and intended use of the header.ThisFor normative headers, this proposal MUST be published as an RFC. A registered header name MUST conform at least to the syntax defined by RFC 2822, section 3.6.8, for "field name". Further, the "." character is reserved to indicate a naming sub- structure and MUST NOT be included in any registered header name. Currently, no specific sub-structure is defined; if used, any such structure MUST be defined by a standards track RFC document. It is further RECOMMENDED that characters in a registered message header name are restricted to those characters that can be used without escaping in a URI[16][24] or URN[11],[15], namely upper- or lower- case ASCII letters, decimal digits, "(", ")", "+", ",", "-", "=", "@", ";", "$", "_", "!", "*" and "'". Of course, a header name must also conform to any applicable rules of the protocol(s) with which itmay beis used. Many headers names may find some use in conjunction withXML,XML [39], in which case the name characters should be further restricted to just letters, digits, hyphen ('-') and underscore ('_') characters, with the first character being a letter or underscore. Klyne, et al. Expires July 30, 2002 [Page 6] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 3.2 Registration templates The registration template for a message header may be contained in the defining document, or prepared separately. 3.2.1 Normative header template An header registered as a Normative Message Header MUST be defined according to "IETF Consensus" rules (per RFC 2434[18]),[26]), and MUST have a name which is unique among all the Normative Message Headers that may be used with the same applicationprotocol(s).protocol. The header name MUST NOT start with "X-" or "x-". The registration templatecontainshas the followinginformation:form. NORMATIVE HEADER REGISTRATION TEMPLATE: Header field name: The name requested for the new header. This MUST conform to the header specification details above. Applicableprotocol(s):protocol: Specify "mail","news","http", "news", or cite any other standards-trackKlyne Expires July 5, 2002 [Page 6] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002RFC defining the protocol with which the header is intended to be used.Alternatively, specify "any" to indicate that there is no specified restriction on the protocol with which the registered header may be used; in this case, the header name must be unique within the Normative Message Header registry.Specification document(s): Reference to the RFC(s) that specify the header for use with the indicatedprotocol(s).protocol. An indication of the relevant sections MAY also be included, but is not required. Related information: Optionally, citations to additional documents containing further relevant information. 3.2.2 Provisional header template Registration as a Provisional Message Header does not imply any kind of endorsement by the IETF, IANA or any other body. The only requirement for a header to be registered as a Provisional Message Header is that it MUST have a citable specification. The registration templatecontainshas the followinginformation:form. PROVISIONAL HEADER REGISTRATION TEMPLATE: Klyne, et al. Expires July 30, 2002 [Page 7] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 Header field name: The name requested for the new header. This SHOULD conform to the header specification details above. Applicableprotocol(s):protocol: Specify "mail","news","http", "news", or cite any other standards-track RFC defining the protocol with which the header is intended to be used.Alternatively, specify "any" to indicate that there is no specified restriction on the protocol with which the registered header may be used.Specification document(s): Reference to document(s) that specifies the header for use with the indicatedprotocol(s). Related information: Optionally, citations to additional documents containing furtherprotocol. An indication of the relevantinformation. Klyne Expires July 5, 2002 [Page 7] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002sections MAY also be included, but is not required. Author/Change controller: The name and email address of the author, and person who may authorize changes to or retraction of the registration. Related information: Optionally, citations to additional documents containing further relevant information. 3.3 Submission of registration The registration is submitted for incorporation in the IANA message header registry by one of the following means: o An IANA considerations section in a defining RFC, calling for registration of the message header and referencing the registration template within the same document. Registration of the header is processed as part of the RFC publication process. o Sending the registration template in an email to the designated email address[27].[45]. IANA will register the message header if the requested name and the specification document meet the criteria stated. 3.4 Change control Change control of a header registration is subject to the same condition as the initial registration; i.e. publication of an IESG- approved RFC for a Normative Message Header, or on request of the indicatedauthor/cgangeauthor/change controller for a Provisional Message Header. In addition, a change to or retraction of Provisional Message Header registration may be requested by the IESG. Klyne, et al. Expires July 30, 2002 [Page 8] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 It is intended that entries in the Normative Header Registry may be used in the construction of URNs (per RFC 2141[11])[15]) which have particular requirements for uniqueness and persistence (per RFC 1737 [4]). Therefore, once an entry is made in the Normative Message Header registry, the combination of the header name andanyapplicable protcol MUST NOT subsequently be registered for any other purpose. (This is not to preclude revision of the applicable specification(s) within the appropriate IETF Consensus rules, and corresponding updates to the specification citation in the header registration.) 3.5 Comments on header definitions[[[Review this]]] Comments on registered Normative Message Headers should be sent to the IETF-822 email discussion list [27]. Klyne Expires July 5, 2002 [Page 8] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002Comments on proposed message headers should preferably be sent to the discusion forum for the protocol specification concerned. They may also be sent to the IETF-822 list[27][45] if they concern wider implications than are addressed by the protocol header specification document. 3.6 Location of message header registry The message header registry is accessible from IANA's web site[28].[46]. 4.Initial registrations [[[I am currently minded to prepare two companion documents that template the normative and provisional headers from RFC 2076, rather than try to have them all in this document.]]]IANA considerations This specification calls for: o A new IANA registry forinitial registration of allnormative message headersdefined in existing standards-track documents. A list of such headers can be found in RFC 2076 [8] and updates [25]. Sectionper section Section2.23 of thisdocument contains a list of standards-track specifications that define message headers. [[[Need to provide list of headers+documents heredocument. The policy forinitial registration?]]] 5. IANA considerations This specification calls for:inclusion in this registry is described in sections Section 3.1 and Section 3.2.1. o A newtwo-partIANA registry for provisional message headers per section Section 3 of this document. Thepoliciespolicy for inclusion inthethis registryareis described in sections Section 3.1 and Section3.2. o [[[Details TBD:3.2.2. Initial header registrations are provided by the following companion documents: o For mail message headers: Registration of mail headerregistrations, per section Section 4fields [42] o For HTTP message headers: Registration ofthis document.]]] 6.HTTP header fields [43] 5. Security considerations No security considerations are introduced by this specification beyond those alreadyinherrentinherent in the use of message headers.7. Acknowledgements The author gratefully acknowledges the contributions of: Charles Lindsey, [[[...]]] References KlyneKlyne, et al. Expires July5,30, 2002 [Page 9] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 6. Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution of those who reviewed earlier versions of this memo: Charles Lindsey, [[[...]]] References [1] Horton, M. and R. Adams, "Standard for interchange of USENET messages", RFC 1036, December 1987. [2] Alvestrand, H., Jordan, K. and J. Romaguera, "Rules for downgrading messages from X.400/88 to X.400/84 when MIME content-types are present in the messages", RFC 1496, August 1993. [3] Costanzo, A., Robinson, D. and R. Ullmann, "Encoding Header Field for Internet Messages", RFC 1505, August 1993. [4] Masinter, L. and K. Sollins, "Functional Requirements for Uniform Resource Names", RFC 1737, December 1994. [5] Alvestrand, H., "Tags for the Identification of Languages", RFC 1766, March 1995. [6] Myers, J. and M. Rose, "The Content-MD5 Header Field", RFC 1864, October 1995. [7] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R. and H. Nielsen, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.0", RFC 1945, May 1996. [8] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies", RFC 2045, November 1996.[8][9] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046, November 1996. [10] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Nielsen, H. and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2068, January 1997. [11] Palme, J., "Common Internet Message Headers", RFC 2076, February 1997.[9][12] Kristol, D. and L. Montulli, "HTTP State Management Mechanism", RFC 2109, February 1997. Klyne, et al. Expires July 30, 2002 [Page 10] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 [13] Palme, J. and A. Hopmann, "MIME E-mail Encapsulation of Aggregate Documents, such as HTML (MHTML)", RFC 2110, March 1997.[10][14] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.[11][15] Moats, R., "URN Syntax", RFC 2141, May 1997.[12][16] Kille, S., "MIXER (Mime Internet X.400 Enhanced Relay): Mapping between X.400 and RFC 822/MIME", RFC 2156, January 1998.[13][17] Moore, K., Troost, R. and S. Dorner, "Communicating Presentation Information in Internet Messages: The Content- Disposition Header Field", RFC 2183, August 1997.[14][18] Mogul, J. and P. Leach, "Simple Hit-Metering and Usage-Limiting for HTTP", RFC 2227, October 1997. [19] Holtman, K. and A. Mutz, "Transparent Content Negotiation in HTTP", RFC 2295, March 1998. [20] Fajman, R., "An Extensible Message Format for Message Disposition Notifications", RFC 2298, March 1998.[15][21] Holtman, K., "The Safe Response Header Field", RFC 2310, April 1998. [22] Masinter, L., "Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol (HTCPCP/1.0)", RFC 2324, April 1998. [23] Baer, J. and G. Neufeld, "The Use of URLs as Meta-Syntax for Core Mail List Commands and their Transport through MessageKlyne Expires July 5, 2002 [Page 10] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002Header Fields", RFC 2369, July 1998.[16][24] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R. and L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396, August 1998.[17][25] Parsons, G. and G. Vaudreuil, "Voice Profile for Internet Mail - version 2", RFC 2421, September 1998.[18][26] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, October 1998.[19][27] Goland, Y., Whitehead, E., Faizi, A., Carter, S. and D. Jensen, "HTTP Extensions for Distributed Authoring -- WEBDAV", RFC Klyne, et al. Expires July 30, 2002 [Page 11] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 2518, February 1999. [28] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Nielsen, H., Masinter, L., Leach, P. and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.[20][29] Franks, J., Hallam-Baker, P., Hostetler, J., Lawrence, S., Leach, P., Luotonen, A. and L. Stewart, "HTTP Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication", RFC 2617, June 1999. [30] Moats, R., "A URN Namespace for IETF Documents", RFC 2648, August 1999.[21][31] Rescorla, E. and A. Schiffman, "The Secure HyperText Transfer Protocol", RFC 2660, August 1999. [32] Nielsen, H., Leach, P. and S. Lawrence, "An HTTP Extension Framework", RFC 2774, February 2000. [33] Klensin, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", RFC 2821, April 2001.[22][34] Resnick, P., "Internet Message Format", RFC 2822, April 2001.[23][35] Herriot, R., Butler, S., Moore, P., Turner, R. and J. Wenn, "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Encoding and Transport", RFC 2910, September 2000. [36] Klyne, G., "Indicating Media Features for MIME Content", RFC 2912, September 2000.[24][37] Chandhok, R. and G. Wenger, "List-Id: A Structured Field and Namespace for the Identification of Mailing Lists", RFC 2919, April 2001.[25][38] Kristol, D. and L. Montulli, "HTTP State Management Mechanism", RFC 2965, October 2000. [39] Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C. and E. Maler, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (2nd ed)", W3C Recommendation xml, October 2000, <http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006>. [40] Palme, J., "Common Internet Message Header Fields", Internet draft draft-palme-mailext-headers-05, May 2001, <http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-palme-mailext- headers-05.txt>.[26]Klyne, et al. Expires July 30, 2002 [Page 12] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 [41] Bernstein, D., "Internet mail field name index", <http://cr.yp.to/immhf/index.html>.[27][42] Klyne, G., "Registration of mail header fields", Internet draft [[[draft-klyne-hdrreg-mail-00]]], Jan 2002, <[[[http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-klyne-hdrreg- mail-00.txt]]]>. [43] Nottingham, M. and J. Mogul, "Registration of HTTP header fields", Internet draft [[[draft-nottingham-hdrreg-http-00]]], Jan 2002, <[[[http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft- nottingham-hdrreg-http-00.txt]]]>. [44] Feldmann, A., "Usage of HTTP header fields", December 1998, <http://www.research.att.com/~anja/w3c_webchar/http_header.html> . [45] "Mail address for submission of header registration template", <mailto:[[[ietf-message-headers]]]@iana.org>.[28][46] "IANA list of registered message headers", <http://www.iana.org/[[[ToBeDefined]]]>.Klyne Expires July 5, 2002 [Page 11] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 Author's AddressAuthors' Addresses Graham Klyne MIMEsweeper Group 1310 Waterside Arlington Business Park Theale, Reading RG7 4SA UK Phone: +44 118 903 8000 Fax: +44 118 903 9000 EMail: Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com Mark Nottingham EMail: mnot@pobox.com URI: http://www.mnot.net/ Klyne, et al. Expires July 30, 2002 [Page 13] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 Jeffrey C. Mogul Western Research Laboratory, Compaq Computer Corporation 250 University Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94305 US Phone: 1 650 617 3304 (email preferred) EMail: JeffMogul@acm.org Appendix A. Revision history(This[[[Please remove this sectionto be removedon finalpublication)publication]]] A.1 draft-klyne-msghdr-registry-02 02a 22-Jan-2002: * Merged with HTTP header registry proposal. * Move initial registrations to separate documents. 02b 29-Jan-2002: * Editorial revisions. A.2 draft-klyne-msghdr-registry-01 01a 04-Jan-2002: * In response to feedback from interested parties, expanded the registry to cover Normative and Provisional message header registrations. * Defined a formal role for the applicable protocol(s) in the registry: the combination of header name and any applicable protocol must be unique for a Normative Message Header. * Noted further constraints to the header name format for XML name compatibility. * Fixed registration policy for a Normative Message Header to be "IETF Consensus".A.2Klyne, et al. Expires July 30, 2002 [Page 14] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 A.3 draft-klyne-msghdr-registry-00 00a 27-Sep-2001: * Document initially created. Appendix B. Todo(This[[[Please remove this sectionto be removedon finalpublication)publication]]] o Finalize references to initial registrations.Klyne Expires July 5, 2002 [Page 12] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002o Finalize email address for submission of registration templates. o Finalize web address for registry.Klyneo Confirm that IANA are comfortable with the proposed procedures. In particular the uniqueness requirements on registry entries. o Consider the following comment about X-headers: we may need to do that protocol-by-protocol; IIRC their status is different in HTTP than in mail, for example. In the case of HTTP, I don't think X- headers should be encouraged; however, I can see documenting current X- headers. The trick is distinguishing between current and new. If we don't take X-headers, it sends the message that they shouldn't be used because you can't check the status of them. o Consider whether provisions to prevent abuse are OK. Currently, IESG can override any registration. One alternative proposed was to have IESG-appointed domain expert review of all registrations. o Should the controller of a registration always be the author of the corresponding specification. o Confirm this is OK: no change controller is specified for normative headers because these are effectively under control of IESG, by virtue of being specified by an IESG-approved RFC. Klyne, et al. Expires July5,30, 2002 [Page13]15] Internet-Draft Message header registration Jan 2002 Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Acknowledgement Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society.KlyneKlyne, et al. Expires July5,30, 2002 [Page14]16] ----