Internet DRAFT - draft-thomson-http-binary-message
draft-thomson-http-binary-message
HTTPBIS M. Thomson
Internet-Draft Mozilla
Intended status: Standards Track C.A. Wood
Expires: 11 February 2022 Cloudflare
10 August 2021
Binary Representation of HTTP Messages
draft-thomson-http-binary-message-01
Abstract
This document defines a binary format for representing HTTP messages.
Discussion Venues
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
Discussion of this document takes place on the HTTP Working Group
mailing list (http@ietf.org), which is archived at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/http/.
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
https://github.com/unicorn-wg/oblivious-http.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 11 February 2022.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text
as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Known Length Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Indeterminate Length Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3. Framing Indicator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.4. Request Control Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.5. Response Control Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.5.1. Informational Status Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.6. Header and Trailer Field Lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.7. Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Invalid Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.1. Request Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.2. Response Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. "message/bhttp" Media Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1. Introduction
This document defines a simple format for representing an HTTP
message ([HTTP]), either request or response. This allows for the
encoding of HTTP messages that can be conveyed outside of an HTTP
protocol. This enables the transformation of entire messages,
including the application of authenticated encryption.
This format is informed by the framing structure of HTTP/2 ([H2]) and
HTTP/3 ([H3]). In comparison, this format simpler by virtue of not
including either header compression ([HPACK], [QPACK]) or a generic
framing layer.
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
This format provides an alternative to the "message/http" content
type defined in [MESSAGING]. A binary format permits more efficient
encoding and processing of messages. A binary format also reduces
exposure to security problems related to processing of HTTP messages.
Two modes for encoding are described:
* a known-length encoding includes length prefixes for all major
message components; and
* an indefinite-length encoding enables efficient generation of
messages where lengths are not known when encoding starts.
2. Conventions and Definitions
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
This document uses terminology from HTTP ([HTTP]) and notation from
QUIC (Section 1.3 of [QUIC]).
3. Format
Section 6 of [HTTP] defines five distinct parts to HTTP messages. A
framing indicator is added to signal how these parts are composed:
1. Framing indicator. This format uses a single integer to describe
framing, which describes whether the message is a request or
response and how subsequent sections are formatted; see
Section 3.3.
2. For a response, any number of interim responses, each consisting
of an informational status code and header section.
3. Control data. For a request, this contains the request method
and target. For a response, this contains the status code.
4. Header section. This contains zero or more header fields.
5. Content. This is a sequence of zero or more bytes.
6. Trailer section. This contains zero or more trailer fields.
All lengths and numeric values are encoded using the variable-length
integer encoding from Section 16 of [QUIC].
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
3.1. Known Length Messages
A message that has a known length at the time of construction uses
the format shown in Figure 1.
Message with Known-Length {
Framing Indicator (i) = 0..1,
Known-Length Informational Response (..) ...,
Control Data (..),
Known-Length Field Section (..),
Known-Length Content (..),
Known-Length Field Section (..),
}
Known-Length Field Section {
Length (i) = 2..,
Field Line (..) ...,
}
Known-Length Content {
Content Length (i),
Content (..)
}
Known-Length Informational Response {
Informational Response Control Data (..),
Known-Length Field Section (..),
}
Figure 1: Known-Length Message
That is, a known-length message consists of a framing indicator, a
block of control data that is formatted according to the value of the
framing indicator, a header section with a length prefix, binary
content with a length prefix, and a trailer section with a length
prefix.
Response messages that contain informational status codes result in a
different structure; see Section 3.5.1.
Fields in the header and trailer sections consist of a length-
prefixed name and length-prefixed value. Both name and value are
sequences of bytes that cannot be zero length.
The format allows for the message to be truncated before any of the
length prefixes that precede the field sections or content. This
reduces the overall message size. A message that is truncated at any
other point is invalid; see Section 4.
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
The variable-length integer encoding means that there is a limit of
2^62-1 bytes for each field section and the message content.
3.2. Indeterminate Length Messages
A message that is constructed without encoding a known length for
each section uses the format shown in Figure 2:
Indeterminate-Length Message {
Framing Indicator (i) = 2..3,
Indeterminate-Length Informational Response (..) ...,
Control Data (..),
Indeterminate-Length Field Section (..),
Indeterminate-Length Content (..) ...,
Indeterminate-Length Field Section (..),
}
Indeterminate-Length Content {
Indeterminate-Length Content Chunk (..) ...,
Content Terminator (i) = 0,
}
Indeterminate-Length Content Chunk {
Chunk Length (i) = 1..,
Chunk (..)
}
Indeterminate-Length Field Section {
Field Line (..) ...,
Content Terminator (i) = 0,
}
Indeterminate-Length Informational Response {
Informational Response Control Data (..),
Indeterminate-Length Field Section (..),
}
Figure 2: Indeterminate-Length Message
That is, an indeterminate length consists of a framing indicator, a
block of control data that is formatted according to the value of the
framing indicator, a header section that is terminated by a zero
value, any number of non-zero-length chunks of binary content, a zero
value, and a trailer section that is terminated by a zero value.
Response messages that contain informational status codes result in a
different structure; see Section 3.5.1.
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
Indeterminate-length messages can be truncated in a similar way as
known-length messages. Truncation occurs after the control data, or
after the Content Terminator field that ends a field section or
sequence of content chunks. A message that is truncated at any other
point is invalid; see Section 4.
Indeterminate-length messages use the same encoding for field lines
as known-length messages; see Section 3.6.
3.3. Framing Indicator
The start of each is a framing indicator that is a single integer
that describes the structure of the subsequent sections. The framing
indicator can take just four values:
* A value of 0 describes a request of known length.
* A value of 1 describes a response of known length.
* A value of 2 describes a request of indeterminate length.
* A value of 3 describes a response of indeterminate length.
Other values cause the message to be invalid; see Section 4.
3.4. Request Control Data
The control data for a request message includes four values that
correspond to the values of the ":method", ":scheme", ":authority",
and ":path" pseudo-header fields described in HTTP/2 (Section 8.3.1
of [H2]). These fields are encoded, each with a length prefix, in
the order listed.
The rules in Section 8.3 of [H2] for constructing pseudo-header
fields apply to the construction of these values. However, where the
":authority" pseudo-header field might be omitted in HTTP/2, a zero-
length value is encoded instead.
The format of request control data is shown in Figure 3.
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
Request Control Data {
Method Length (i),
Method (..),
Scheme Length (i),
Scheme (..),
Authority Length (i),
Authority (..),
Path Length (i),
Path (..),
}
Figure 3: Format of Request Control Data
3.5. Response Control Data
The control data for a request message includes a single field that
corresponds to the ":status" pseudo-header field in HTTP/2; see
Section 8.3.2 of [H2]. This field is encoded as a single variable
length integer, not a decimal string.
The format of final response control data is shown in Figure 4.
Final Response Control Data {
Status Code (i) = 200..599,
}
Figure 4: Format of Final Response Control Data
3.5.1. Informational Status Codes
Responses that include information status codes (see Section 15.2 of
[HTTP]) are encoded by repeating the response control data and
associated header section until the final status code is encoded.
The format of the informational response control data is shown in
Figure 5.
Informational Response Control Data {
Status Code (i) = 100..199,
}
Figure 5: Format of Informational Response Control Data
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
A response message can include any number of informational responses.
If the response control data includes an informational status code
(that is, a value between 100 and 199 inclusive), the control data is
followed by a header section (encoded with known- or indeterminate-
length according to the framing indicator). After the header
section, another response control data block follows.
3.6. Header and Trailer Field Lines
Header and trailer sections consist of zero or more field lines; see
Section 5 of [HTTP]. The format of a field section depends on
whether the message is known- or intermediate-length.
Each field line includes a name and a value. Both the name and value
are non-zero length sequences of bytes. The format of a field line
is shown in Figure 6.
Field Line {
Name Length (i) = 1..,
Name (..),
Value Length (i) = 1..,
Value (..),
}
Figure 6: Format of a Field Line
For field names, byte values that are not permitted in an HTTP field
name cause the message to be invalid; see Section 5.1 of [HTTP] for a
definition of what is valid and Section 4 for handling of invalid
messages.
Field names and values MUST be constructed and validated according to
the rules of Section 8.2.1 of [H2]. A recipient MUST treat a message
that HTTP/2 regards as malformed by these rules as invalid; see
Section 4.
The same field name can be repeated in multiple field lines; see
Section 5.2 of [HTTP] for the semantics of repeated field names and
rules for combining values.
Like HTTP/2, this format has an exception for the combination of
multiple instances of the "Cookie" field. Instances of fields with
the ASCII-encoded value of "cookie" are combined using a semicolon
octet (0x3b) rather than a comma; see Section 8.2.3 of [H2].
This format provides fixed locations for content that would be
carried in HTTP/2 pseudo-fields. Therefore, there is no need to
include field lines containing a name of ":method", ":scheme",
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
":authority", ":path", or ":status". Fields that contain one of
these names cause the message to be invalid; see Section 4. Pseudo-
fields that are defined by protocol extensions MAY be included.
Field lines containing pseudo-fields MUST precede other field lines;
a message that contains a pseudo-field after any other field is
invalid; see Section 4.
3.7. Content
The content of messages is a sequence of bytes of any length. Though
a known-length message has a limit, this limit is large enough that
it is unlikely to be a practical limitation. There is no limit to
the size of content in an indeterminate length message.
Omitting content by truncating a message is only possible if the
content is zero-length.
4. Invalid Messages
This document describes a number of ways that a message can be
invalid. Invalid messages MUST NOT be processed except to log an
error and produce an error response.
The format is designed to allow incremental processing.
Implementations need to be aware of the possibility that an error
might be detected after performing incremental processing.
5. Examples
This section includes example requests and responses encoded in both
known-length and indefinite-length forms.
5.1. Request Example
The example HTTP/1.1 message in Figure 7 shows the content of a
"message/http".
Valid HTTP/1.1 messages require lines terminated with CRLF (the two
bytes 0x0a and 0x0d). For simplicity and consistency, the content of
these examples is limited to text, which also uses CRLF for line
endings.
GET /hello.txt HTTP/1.1
User-Agent: curl/7.16.3 libcurl/7.16.3 OpenSSL/0.9.7l zlib/1.2.3
Host: www.example.com
Accept-Language: en, mi
Figure 7: Sample HTTP Request
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
This can be expressed as a binary message (type "message/bhttp")
using a known-length encoding as shown in hexadecimal in Figure 8.
Figure 8 view includes some of the text alongside to show that most
of the content is not modified.
00034745 54056874 74707300 0a2f6865 ..GET.https../he
6c6c6f2e 74787440 6c0a7573 65722d61 llo.txt@l.user-a
67656e74 34637572 6c2f372e 31362e33 gent4curl/7.16.3
206c6962 6375726c 2f372e31 362e3320 libcurl/7.16.3
4f70656e 53534c2f 302e392e 376c207a OpenSSL/0.9.7l z
6c69622f 312e322e 3304686f 73740f77 lib/1.2.3.host.w
77772e65 78616d70 6c652e63 6f6d0f61 ww.example.com.a
63636570 742d6c61 6e677561 67650665 ccept-language.e
6e2c206d 690000 n, mi..
Figure 8: Known-Length Binary Encoding of Request
This example shows that the Host header field is not replicated in
the :authority field, as is required for ensuring that the request is
reproduced accurately; see Section 8.3.1 of [H2].
The same message can be truncated with no effect on interpretation.
In this case, the last two bytes - corresponding to content and a
trailer section - can each be removed without altering the semantics
of the message.
The same message, encoded using an indefinite-length encoding is
shown in Figure 9. As the content of this message is empty, the
difference in formats is negligible.
02034745 54056874 74707300 0a2f6865 ..GET.https../he
6c6c6f2e 7478740a 75736572 2d616765 llo.txt.user-age
6e743463 75726c2f 372e3136 2e33206c nt4curl/7.16.3 l
69626375 726c2f37 2e31362e 33204f70 ibcurl/7.16.3 Op
656e5353 4c2f302e 392e376c 207a6c69 enSSL/0.9.7l zli
622f312e 322e3304 686f7374 0f777777 b/1.2.3.host.www
2e657861 6d706c65 2e636f6d 0f616363 .example.com.acc
6570742d 6c616e67 75616765 06656e2c ept-language.en,
206d6900 0000 mi...
Figure 9: Indefinite-Length Binary Encoding of Request
This indefinite-length encoding can be truncated by two bytes in the
same way.
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
5.2. Response Example
Response messages can contain interim (1xx) status codes as the
message in Figure 10 shows. Figure 10 includes examples of
informational status codes defined in [RFC2518] and [RFC8297].
HTTP/1.1 102 Processing
Running: "sleep 15"
HTTP/1.1 103 Early Hints
Link: </style.css>; rel=preload; as=style
Link: </script.js>; rel=preload; as=script
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 12:28:53 GMT
Server: Apache
Last-Modified: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 19:15:56 GMT
ETag: "34aa387-d-1568eb00"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 51
Vary: Accept-Encoding
Content-Type: text/plain
Hello World! My content includes a trailing CRLF.
Figure 10: Sample HTTP Response
As this is a longer example, only the indefinite-length encoding is
shown in Figure 11. Note here that the specific text used in the
reason phrase is not retained by this encoding.
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
03406607 72756e6e 696e670a 22736c65 .@f.running."sle
65702031 35220040 67046c69 6e6b233c ep 15".@g.link#<
2f737479 6c652e63 73733e3b 2072656c /style.css>; rel
3d707265 6c6f6164 3b206173 3d737479 =preload; as=sty
6c65046c 696e6b24 3c2f7363 72697074 le.link$</script
2e6a733e 3b207265 6c3d7072 656c6f61 .js>; rel=preloa
643b2061 733d7363 72697074 0040c804 d; as=script.@..
64617465 1d4d6f6e 2c203237 204a756c date.Mon, 27 Jul
20323030 39203132 3a32383a 35332047 2009 12:28:53 G
4d540673 65727665 72064170 61636865 MT.server.Apache
0d6c6173 742d6d6f 64696669 65641d57 .last-modified.W
65642c20 3232204a 756c2032 30303920 ed, 22 Jul 2009
31393a31 353a3536 20474d54 04657461 19:15:56 GMT.eta
67142233 34616133 38372d64 2d313536 g."34aa387-d-156
38656230 30220d61 63636570 742d7261 8eb00".accept-ra
6e676573 05627974 65730e63 6f6e7465 nges.bytes.conte
6e742d6c 656e6774 68023531 04766172 nt-length.51.var
790f4163 63657074 2d456e63 6f64696e y.Accept-Encodin
670c636f 6e74656e 742d7479 70650a74 g.content-type.t
6578742f 706c6169 6e003348 656c6c6f ext/plain.3Hello
20576f72 6c642120 4d792063 6f6e7465 World! My conte
6e742069 6e636c75 64657320 61207472 nt includes a tr
61696c69 6e672043 524c462e 0d0a0000 ailing CRLF.....
Figure 11: Binary Response including Interim Responses
A response that uses the chunked encoding (see Section 7.1 of
[MESSAGING]) as shown for Figure 12 can be encoded using indefinite-
length encoding, which minimizes buffering needed to translate into
the binary format. However, chunk boundaries do not need to be
retained and any chunk extensions cannot be conveyed using the binary
format.
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
4
This
6
conte
13;chunk-extension=foo
nt contains CRLF.
0
Trailer: text
Figure 12: Chunked Encoding Example
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
Figure 13 shows this message using the known-length coding. Note
that the transfer-encoding header field is removed.
0140c800 1d546869 7320636f 6e74656e .@...This conten
7420636f 6e746169 6e732043 524c462e t contains CRLF.
0d0a0d07 74726169 6c657204 74657874 ....trailer.text
Figure 13: Known-Length Encoding of Response
6. "message/bhttp" Media Type
The message/http media type can be used to enclose a single HTTP
request or response message, provided that it obeys the MIME
restrictions for all "message" types regarding line length and
encodings.
Type name: message
Subtype name: bhttp
Required parameters: N/A
Optional parameters: None
Encoding considerations: only "8bit" or "binary" is permitted
Security considerations: see Section 7
Interoperability considerations: N/A
Published specification: this specification
Applications that use this media type: N/A
Fragment identifier considerations: N/A
Additional information: Magic number(s): N/A
Deprecated alias names for this type: N/A
File extension(s): N/A
Macintosh file type code(s): N/A
Person and email address to contact for further information: see Aut
hors' Addresses section
Intended usage: COMMON
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
Restrictions on usage: N/A
Author: see Authors' Addresses section
Change controller: IESG
7. Security Considerations
Many of the considerations that apply to HTTP message handling apply
to this format; see Section 17 of [HTTP] and Section 11 of
[MESSAGING] for common issues in handling HTTP messages.
Strict parsing of the format with no tolerance for errors can help
avoid a number of attacks. However, implementations still need to be
aware of the possibility of resource exhaustion attacks that might
arise from receiving large messages, particularly those with large
numbers of fields.
The format is designed to allow for minimal state when translating
for use with HTTP proper. However, producing a combined value for
fields, which might be necessary for the "Cookie" field when
translating this format (like HTTP/1.1 [MESSAGING]), can require the
commitment of resources. Implementations need to ensure that they
aren't subject to resource exhaustion attack from a maliciously
crafted message.
8. IANA Considerations
Please add the "Media Types" registry at
https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types
(https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types) with the registration
information in Section 6 for the media type "message/bhttp".
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[H2] Thomson, M. and C. Benfield, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol
Version 2 (HTTP/2)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
draft-ietf-httpbis-http2bis-03, 12 July 2021,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-
http2bis-03>.
[HTTP] Fielding, R. T., Nottingham, M., and J. Reschke, "HTTP
Semantics", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
httpbis-semantics-17, 25 July 2021,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-
semantics-17>.
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
[MESSAGING]
Fielding, R. T., Nottingham, M., and J. Reschke,
"HTTP/1.1", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
httpbis-messaging-17, 25 July 2021,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-
messaging-17>.
[QUIC] Iyengar, J., Ed. and M. Thomson, Ed., "QUIC: A UDP-Based
Multiplexed and Secure Transport", RFC 9000,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9000, May 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9000>.
[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/rfc/rfc2119>.
[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/rfc/rfc8174>.
9.2. Informative References
[H3] Bishop, M., "Hypertext Transfer Protocol Version 3
(HTTP/3)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
quic-http-34, 2 February 2021,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-quic-
http-34>.
[HPACK] Peon, R. and H. Ruellan, "HPACK: Header Compression for
HTTP/2", RFC 7541, DOI 10.17487/RFC7541, May 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7541>.
[QPACK] Krasic, C. '., Bishop, M., and A. Frindell, "QPACK: Header
Compression for HTTP/3", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
draft-ietf-quic-qpack-21, 2 February 2021,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-quic-
qpack-21>.
[RFC2518] Goland, Y., Whitehead, E., Faizi, A., Carter, S., and D.
Jensen, "HTTP Extensions for Distributed Authoring --
WEBDAV", RFC 2518, DOI 10.17487/RFC2518, February 1999,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2518>.
[RFC8297] Oku, K., "An HTTP Status Code for Indicating Hints",
RFC 8297, DOI 10.17487/RFC8297, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8297>.
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Binary HTTP Messages August 2021
Acknowledgments
TODO: credit where credit is due.
Authors' Addresses
Martin Thomson
Mozilla
Email: mt@lowentropy.net
Christopher A. Wood
Cloudflare
Email: caw@heapingbits.net
Thomson & Wood Expires 11 February 2022 [Page 16]
