One document matched: draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-00.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--
This XML document is the output of clean-for-DTD.xslt; a tool that strips
extensions to RFC2629(bis) from documents for processing with xml2rfc.
-->
<?rfc toc="yes" ?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no" ?>
<?rfc linkmailto="no" ?>
<?rfc editing="no" ?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc
PUBLIC "" "rfc2629.dtd">
<rfc obsoletes="2068, 2616" category="std" ipr="full3978" docName="draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-00">
<front>
<title abbrev="HTTP/1.1, part 4">HTTP/1.1, part 4: Conditional Requests</title>
<author initials="R." surname="Fielding" fullname="Roy T. Fielding" role="editor">
<organization abbrev="Day Software">Day Software</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>23 Corporate Plaza DR, Suite 280</street>
<city>Newport Beach</city>
<region>CA</region>
<code>92660</code>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<phone>+1-949-706-5300</phone>
<facsimile>+1-949-706-5305</facsimile>
<email>fielding@gbiv.com</email>
<uri>http://roy.gbiv.com/</uri>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Gettys" fullname="Jim Gettys">
<organization>One Laptop per Child</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>21 Oak Knoll Road</street>
<city>Carlisle</city>
<region>MA</region>
<code>01741</code>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<email>jg@laptop.org</email>
<uri>http://www.laptop.org/</uri>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Mogul" fullname="Jeffrey C. Mogul">
<organization abbrev="HP">Hewlett-Packard Company</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>HP Labs, Large Scale Systems Group</street>
<street>1501 Page Mill Road, MS 1177</street>
<city>Palo Alto</city>
<region>CA</region>
<code>94304</code>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<email>JeffMogul@acm.org</email>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="H." surname="Frystyk" fullname="Henrik Frystyk Nielsen">
<organization abbrev="Microsoft">Microsoft Corporation</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>1 Microsoft Way</street>
<city>Redmond</city>
<region>WA</region>
<code>98052</code>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<email>henrikn@microsoft.com</email>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="L." surname="Masinter" fullname="Larry Masinter">
<organization abbrev="Adobe Systems">Adobe Systems, Incorporated</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>345 Park Ave</street>
<city>San Jose</city>
<region>CA</region>
<code>95110</code>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<email>LMM@acm.org</email>
<uri>http://larry.masinter.net/</uri>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="P." surname="Leach" fullname="Paul J. Leach">
<organization abbrev="Microsoft">Microsoft Corporation</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>1 Microsoft Way</street>
<city>Redmond</city>
<region>WA</region>
<code>98052</code>
</postal>
<email>paulle@microsoft.com</email>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="T." surname="Berners-Lee" fullname="Tim Berners-Lee">
<organization abbrev="W3C/MIT">World Wide Web Consortium</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory</street>
<street>The Stata Center, Building 32</street>
<street>32 Vassar Street</street>
<city>Cambridge</city>
<region>MA</region>
<code>02139</code>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<email>timbl@w3.org</email>
<uri>http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/</uri>
</address>
</author>
<date month="December" year="2007"/>
<abstract>
<t>
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 4 of the seven-part specification
that defines the protocol referred to as "HTTP/1.1" and, taken together,
obsoletes RFC 2616. Part 4 defines request header fields for
indicating conditional requests and the rules for constructing responses
to those requests.
</t>
</abstract>
<note title="Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor)">
<t>
This version of the HTTP specification contains only minimal editorial
changes from <xref target="RFC2616"/> (abstract, introductory paragraph,
and authors' addresses). All other changes are due to partitioning the
original into seven mostly independent parts. The intent is for readers
of future drafts to able to use draft 00 as the basis for comparison
when the WG makes later changes to the specification text. This draft
will shortly be followed by draft 01 (containing the first round of changes
that have already been agreed to on the mailing list). There is no point in
reviewing this draft other than to verify that the partitioning has been
done correctly. Roy T. Fielding, Yves Lafon, and Julian Reschke
will be the editors after draft 00 is submitted.
</t>
<t>
Discussion of this draft should take place on the HTTPBIS working group
mailing list (ietf-http-wg@w3.org). The current issues list is
at <eref target="http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/11"/>
and related documents (including fancy diffs) can be found at
<eref target="http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/"/>.
</t>
</note>
</front>
<middle>
<section title="Introduction" anchor="introduction">
<t>
This document will define aspects of HTTP related to conditional
request messages based on time stamps and entity-tags. Right now it
only includes the extracted relevant sections of <xref target="RFC2616">RFC 2616</xref>
without edit.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Entity Tags" anchor="entity.tags">
<t>
Entity tags are used for comparing two or more entities from the same
requested resource. HTTP/1.1 uses entity tags in the ETag (<xref target="header.etag"/>),
If-Match (<xref target="header.if-match"/>), If-None-Match (<xref target="header.if-none-match"/>), and
If-Range (Section 5.3 of <xref target="Part5"/>) header fields. The definition of how they
are used and compared as cache validators is in <xref target="weak.and.strong.validators"/>. An
entity tag consists of an opaque quoted string, possibly prefixed by
a weakness indicator.
</t>
<figure><iref primary="true" item="Grammar" subitem="entity-tag"/><iref primary="true" item="Grammar" subitem="weak"/><iref primary="true" item="Grammar" subitem="opaque-tag"/><artwork type="abnf2616"><![CDATA[
entity-tag = [ weak ] opaque-tag
weak = "W/"
opaque-tag = quoted-string
]]></artwork></figure>
<t>
A "strong entity tag" MAY be shared by two entities of a resource
only if they are equivalent by octet equality.
</t>
<t>
A "weak entity tag," indicated by the "W/" prefix, MAY be shared by
two entities of a resource only if the entities are equivalent and
could be substituted for each other with no significant change in
semantics. A weak entity tag can only be used for weak comparison.
</t>
<t>
An entity tag MUST be unique across all versions of all entities
associated with a particular resource. A given entity tag value MAY
be used for entities obtained by requests on different URIs. The use
of the same entity tag value in conjunction with entities obtained by
requests on different URIs does not imply the equivalence of those
entities.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Status Code Definitions">
<section title="304 Not Modified" anchor="status.304">
<iref primary="true" item="304 Not Modified (status code)"/>
<iref primary="true" item="Status Codes" subitem="304 Not Modified"/>
<t>
If the client has performed a conditional GET request and access is
allowed, but the document has not been modified, the server SHOULD
respond with this status code. The 304 response MUST NOT contain a
message-body, and thus is always terminated by the first empty line
after the header fields.
</t>
<t>
The response MUST include the following header fields:
<list style="symbols">
<t>Date, unless its omission is required by Section 8.3.1 of <xref target="Part1"/></t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
If a clockless origin server obeys these rules, and proxies and
clients add their own Date to any response received without one (as
already specified by <xref target="RFC2068"/>, section 14.19), caches will operate
correctly.
<list style="symbols">
<t>ETag and/or Content-Location, if the header would have been sent
in a 200 response to the same request</t>
<t>Expires, Cache-Control, and/or Vary, if the field-value might
differ from that sent in any previous response for the same
variant</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
If the conditional GET used a strong cache validator (see <xref target="Part6"/>),
the response SHOULD NOT include other entity-headers.
Otherwise (i.e., the conditional GET used a weak validator), the
response MUST NOT include other entity-headers; this prevents
inconsistencies between cached entity-bodies and updated headers.
</t>
<t>
If a 304 response indicates an entity not currently cached, then the
cache MUST disregard the response and repeat the request without the
conditional.
</t>
<t>
If a cache uses a received 304 response to update a cache entry, the
cache MUST update the entry to reflect any new field values given in
the response.
</t>
</section>
<section title="412 Precondition Failed" anchor="status.412">
<iref primary="true" item="412 Precondition Failed (status code)"/>
<iref primary="true" item="Status Codes" subitem="412 Precondition Failed"/>
<t>
The precondition given in one or more of the request-header fields
evaluated to false when it was tested on the server. This response
code allows the client to place preconditions on the current resource
metainformation (header field data) and thus prevent the requested
method from being applied to a resource other than the one intended.
</t>
</section>
</section>
<section title="Weak and Strong Validators" anchor="weak.and.strong.validators">
<t>
Since both origin servers and caches will compare two validators to
decide if they represent the same or different entities, one normally
would expect that if the entity (the entity-body or any entity-headers)
changes in any way, then the associated validator would
change as well. If this is true, then we call this validator a
"strong validator."
</t>
<t>
However, there might be cases when a server prefers to change the
validator only on semantically significant changes, and not when
insignificant aspects of the entity change. A validator that does not
always change when the resource changes is a "weak validator."
</t>
<t>
Entity tags are normally "strong validators," but the protocol
provides a mechanism to tag an entity tag as "weak." One can think of
a strong validator as one that changes whenever the bits of an entity
changes, while a weak value changes whenever the meaning of an entity
changes. Alternatively, one can think of a strong validator as part
of an identifier for a specific entity, while a weak validator is
part of an identifier for a set of semantically equivalent entities.
<list><t>
Note: One example of a strong validator is an integer that is
incremented in stable storage every time an entity is changed.
</t><t>
An entity's modification time, if represented with one-second
resolution, could be a weak validator, since it is possible that
the resource might be modified twice during a single second.
</t><t>
Support for weak validators is optional. However, weak validators
allow for more efficient caching of equivalent objects; for
example, a hit counter on a site is probably good enough if it is
updated every few days or weeks, and any value during that period
is likely "good enough" to be equivalent.
</t></list>
</t>
<t>
A "use" of a validator is either when a client generates a request
and includes the validator in a validating header field, or when a
server compares two validators.
</t>
<t>
Strong validators are usable in any context. Weak validators are only
usable in contexts that do not depend on exact equality of an entity.
For example, either kind is usable for a conditional GET of a full
entity. However, only a strong validator is usable for a sub-range
retrieval, since otherwise the client might end up with an internally
inconsistent entity.
</t>
<t>
Clients MAY issue simple (non-subrange) GET requests with either weak
validators or strong validators. Clients MUST NOT use weak validators
in other forms of request.
</t>
<t>
The only function that the HTTP/1.1 protocol defines on validators is
comparison. There are two validator comparison functions, depending
on whether the comparison context allows the use of weak validators
or not:
<list style="symbols">
<t>The strong comparison function: in order to be considered equal,
both validators MUST be identical in every way, and both MUST NOT
be weak.</t>
<t>The weak comparison function: in order to be considered equal,
both validators MUST be identical in every way, but either or
both of them MAY be tagged as "weak" without affecting the
result.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
An entity tag is strong unless it is explicitly tagged as weak.
<xref target="entity.tags"/> gives the syntax for entity tags.
</t>
<t>
A Last-Modified time, when used as a validator in a request, is
implicitly weak unless it is possible to deduce that it is strong,
using the following rules:
<list style="symbols">
<t>The validator is being compared by an origin server to the
actual current validator for the entity and,</t>
<t>That origin server reliably knows that the associated entity did
not change twice during the second covered by the presented
validator.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
or
<list style="symbols">
<t>The validator is about to be used by a client in an If-Modified-Since
or If-Unmodified-Since header, because the client
has a cache entry for the associated entity, and</t>
<t>That cache entry includes a Date value, which gives the time
when the origin server sent the original response, and</t>
<t>The presented Last-Modified time is at least 60 seconds before
the Date value.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
or
<list style="symbols">
<t>The validator is being compared by an intermediate cache to the
validator stored in its cache entry for the entity, and</t>
<t>That cache entry includes a Date value, which gives the time
when the origin server sent the original response, and</t>
<t>The presented Last-Modified time is at least 60 seconds before
the Date value.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
This method relies on the fact that if two different responses were
sent by the origin server during the same second, but both had the
same Last-Modified time, then at least one of those responses would
have a Date value equal to its Last-Modified time. The arbitrary 60-second
limit guards against the possibility that the Date and Last-Modified
values are generated from different clocks, or at somewhat
different times during the preparation of the response. An
implementation MAY use a value larger than 60 seconds, if it is
believed that 60 seconds is too short.
</t>
<t>
If a client wishes to perform a sub-range retrieval on a value for
which it has only a Last-Modified time and no opaque validator, it
MAY do this only if the Last-Modified time is strong in the sense
described here.
</t>
<t>
A cache or origin server receiving a conditional request, other than
a full-body GET request, MUST use the strong comparison function to
evaluate the condition.
</t>
<t>
These rules allow HTTP/1.1 caches and clients to safely perform sub-range
retrievals on values that have been obtained from HTTP/1.0
servers.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Rules for When to Use Entity Tags and Last-Modified Dates" anchor="rules.for.when.to.use.entity.tags.and.last-modified.dates">
<t>
We adopt a set of rules and recommendations for origin servers,
clients, and caches regarding when various validator types ought to
be used, and for what purposes.
</t>
<t>
HTTP/1.1 origin servers:
<list style="symbols">
<t>SHOULD send an entity tag validator unless it is not feasible to
generate one.</t>
<t>MAY send a weak entity tag instead of a strong entity tag, if
performance considerations support the use of weak entity tags,
or if it is unfeasible to send a strong entity tag.</t>
<t>SHOULD send a Last-Modified value if it is feasible to send one,
unless the risk of a breakdown in semantic transparency that
could result from using this date in an If-Modified-Since header
would lead to serious problems.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
In other words, the preferred behavior for an HTTP/1.1 origin server
is to send both a strong entity tag and a Last-Modified value.
</t>
<t>
In order to be legal, a strong entity tag MUST change whenever the
associated entity value changes in any way. A weak entity tag SHOULD
change whenever the associated entity changes in a semantically
significant way.
<list><t>
Note: in order to provide semantically transparent caching, an
origin server must avoid reusing a specific strong entity tag
value for two different entities, or reusing a specific weak
entity tag value for two semantically different entities. Cache
entries might persist for arbitrarily long periods, regardless of
expiration times, so it might be inappropriate to expect that a
cache will never again attempt to validate an entry using a
validator that it obtained at some point in the past.
</t></list>
</t>
<t>
HTTP/1.1 clients:
<list style="symbols">
<t>If an entity tag has been provided by the origin server, MUST
use that entity tag in any cache-conditional request (using If-Match
or If-None-Match).</t>
<t>If only a Last-Modified value has been provided by the origin
server, SHOULD use that value in non-subrange cache-conditional
requests (using If-Modified-Since).</t>
<t>If only a Last-Modified value has been provided by an HTTP/1.0
origin server, MAY use that value in subrange cache-conditional
requests (using If-Unmodified-Since:). The user agent SHOULD
provide a way to disable this, in case of difficulty.</t>
<t>If both an entity tag and a Last-Modified value have been
provided by the origin server, SHOULD use both validators in
cache-conditional requests. This allows both HTTP/1.0 and
HTTP/1.1 caches to respond appropriately.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
An HTTP/1.1 origin server, upon receiving a conditional request that
includes both a Last-Modified date (e.g., in an If-Modified-Since or
If-Unmodified-Since header field) and one or more entity tags (e.g.,
in an If-Match, If-None-Match, or If-Range header field) as cache
validators, MUST NOT return a response status of 304 (Not Modified)
unless doing so is consistent with all of the conditional header
fields in the request.
</t>
<t>
An HTTP/1.1 caching proxy, upon receiving a conditional request that
includes both a Last-Modified date and one or more entity tags as
cache validators, MUST NOT return a locally cached response to the
client unless that cached response is consistent with all of the
conditional header fields in the request.
<list><t>
Note: The general principle behind these rules is that HTTP/1.1
servers and clients should transmit as much non-redundant
information as is available in their responses and requests.
HTTP/1.1 systems receiving this information will make the most
conservative assumptions about the validators they receive.
</t><t>
HTTP/1.0 clients and caches will ignore entity tags. Generally,
last-modified values received or used by these systems will
support transparent and efficient caching, and so HTTP/1.1 origin
servers should provide Last-Modified values. In those rare cases
where the use of a Last-Modified value as a validator by an
HTTP/1.0 system could result in a serious problem, then HTTP/1.1
origin servers should not provide one.
</t></list>
</t>
</section>
<section title="Header Field Definitions" anchor="header.fields">
<t>
This section defines the syntax and semantics of all standard
HTTP/1.1 header fields. For entity-header fields, both sender and
recipient refer to either the client or the server, depending on who
sends and who receives the entity.
</t>
<section title="ETag" anchor="header.etag">
<iref primary="true" item="ETag header"/>
<iref primary="true" item="Headers" subitem="ETag"/>
<t>
The ETag response-header field provides the current value of the
entity tag for the requested variant. The headers used with entity
tags are described in sections <xref target="header.if-match" format="counter"/>, <xref target="header.if-none-match" format="counter"/> and Section 5.3 of <xref target="Part5"/>. The entity tag
MAY be used for comparison with other entities from the same resource
(see <xref target="weak.and.strong.validators"/>).
</t>
<figure><iref primary="true" item="Grammar" subitem="ETag"/><artwork type="abnf2616"><![CDATA[
ETag = "ETag" ":" entity-tag
]]></artwork></figure>
<figure><preamble>
Examples:
</preamble>
<artwork type="example"><![CDATA[
ETag: "xyzzy"
ETag: W/"xyzzy"
ETag: ""
]]></artwork></figure>
</section>
<section title="If-Match" anchor="header.if-match">
<iref primary="true" item="If-Match header"/>
<iref primary="true" item="Headers" subitem="If-Match"/>
<t>
The If-Match request-header field is used with a method to make it
conditional. A client that has one or more entities previously
obtained from the resource can verify that one of those entities is
current by including a list of their associated entity tags in the
If-Match header field. Entity tags are defined in <xref target="entity.tags"/>. The
purpose of this feature is to allow efficient updates of cached
information with a minimum amount of transaction overhead. It is also
used, on updating requests, to prevent inadvertent modification of
the wrong version of a resource. As a special case, the value "*"
matches any current entity of the resource.
</t>
<figure><iref primary="true" item="Grammar" subitem="If-Match"/><artwork type="abnf2616"><![CDATA[
If-Match = "If-Match" ":" ( "*" | 1#entity-tag )
]]></artwork></figure>
<t>
If any of the entity tags match the entity tag of the entity that
would have been returned in the response to a similar GET request
(without the If-Match header) on that resource, or if "*" is given
and any current entity exists for that resource, then the server MAY
perform the requested method as if the If-Match header field did not
exist.
</t>
<t>
A server MUST use the strong comparison function (see <xref target="weak.and.strong.validators"/>)
to compare the entity tags in If-Match.
</t>
<t>
If none of the entity tags match, or if "*" is given and no current
entity exists, the server MUST NOT perform the requested method, and
MUST return a 412 (Precondition Failed) response. This behavior is
most useful when the client wants to prevent an updating method, such
as PUT, from modifying a resource that has changed since the client
last retrieved it.
</t>
<t>
If the request would, without the If-Match header field, result in
anything other than a 2xx or 412 status, then the If-Match header
MUST be ignored.
</t>
<t>
The meaning of "If-Match: *" is that the method SHOULD be performed
if the representation selected by the origin server (or by a cache,
possibly using the Vary mechanism, see Section 3.5 of <xref target="Part6"/>) exists, and
MUST NOT be performed if the representation does not exist.
</t>
<t>
A request intended to update a resource (e.g., a PUT) MAY include an
If-Match header field to signal that the request method MUST NOT be
applied if the entity corresponding to the If-Match value (a single
entity tag) is no longer a representation of that resource. This
allows the user to indicate that they do not wish the request to be
successful if the resource has been changed without their knowledge.
Examples:
</t>
<figure><artwork type="example"><![CDATA[
If-Match: "xyzzy"
If-Match: "xyzzy", "r2d2xxxx", "c3piozzzz"
If-Match: *
]]></artwork></figure>
<t>
The result of a request having both an If-Match header field and
either an If-None-Match or an If-Modified-Since header fields is
undefined by this specification.
</t>
</section>
<section title="If-Modified-Since" anchor="header.if-modified-since">
<iref primary="true" item="If-Modified-Since header"/>
<iref primary="true" item="Headers" subitem="If-Modified-Since"/>
<t>
The If-Modified-Since request-header field is used with a method to
make it conditional: if the requested variant has not been modified
since the time specified in this field, an entity will not be
returned from the server; instead, a 304 (not modified) response will
be returned without any message-body.
</t>
<figure><iref primary="true" item="Grammar" subitem="If-Modified-Since"/><artwork type="abnf2616"><![CDATA[
If-Modified-Since = "If-Modified-Since" ":" HTTP-date
]]></artwork></figure>
<t>
An example of the field is:
</t>
<figure><artwork type="example"><![CDATA[
If-Modified-Since: Sat, 29 Oct 1994 19:43:31 GMT
]]></artwork></figure>
<t>
A GET method with an If-Modified-Since header and no Range header
requests that the identified entity be transferred only if it has
been modified since the date given by the If-Modified-Since header.
The algorithm for determining this includes the following cases:
<list style="numbers">
<t>If the request would normally result in anything other than a
200 (OK) status, or if the passed If-Modified-Since date is
invalid, the response is exactly the same as for a normal GET.
A date which is later than the server's current time is
invalid.</t>
<t>If the variant has been modified since the If-Modified-Since
date, the response is exactly the same as for a normal GET.</t>
<t>If the variant has not been modified since a valid If-Modified-Since
date, the server SHOULD return a 304 (Not
Modified) response.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
The purpose of this feature is to allow efficient updates of cached
information with a minimum amount of transaction overhead.
<list><t>
Note: The Range request-header field modifies the meaning of If-Modified-Since;
see Section 5.4 of <xref target="Part5"/> for full details.
</t><t>
Note: If-Modified-Since times are interpreted by the server, whose
clock might not be synchronized with the client.
</t><t>
Note: When handling an If-Modified-Since header field, some
servers will use an exact date comparison function, rather than a
less-than function, for deciding whether to send a 304 (Not
Modified) response. To get best results when sending an If-Modified-Since
header field for cache validation, clients are
advised to use the exact date string received in a previous Last-Modified
header field whenever possible.
</t><t>
Note: If a client uses an arbitrary date in the If-Modified-Since
header instead of a date taken from the Last-Modified header for
the same request, the client should be aware of the fact that this
date is interpreted in the server's understanding of time. The
client should consider unsynchronized clocks and rounding problems
due to the different encodings of time between the client and
server. This includes the possibility of race conditions if the
document has changed between the time it was first requested and
the If-Modified-Since date of a subsequent request, and the
possibility of clock-skew-related problems if the If-Modified-Since
date is derived from the client's clock without correction
to the server's clock. Corrections for different time bases
between client and server are at best approximate due to network
latency.
</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
The result of a request having both an If-Modified-Since header field
and either an If-Match or an If-Unmodified-Since header fields is
undefined by this specification.
</t>
</section>
<section title="If-None-Match" anchor="header.if-none-match">
<iref primary="true" item="If-None-Match header"/>
<iref primary="true" item="Headers" subitem="If-None-Match"/>
<t>
The If-None-Match request-header field is used with a method to make
it conditional. A client that has one or more entities previously
obtained from the resource can verify that none of those entities is
current by including a list of their associated entity tags in the
If-None-Match header field. The purpose of this feature is to allow
efficient updates of cached information with a minimum amount of
transaction overhead. It is also used to prevent a method (e.g. PUT)
from inadvertently modifying an existing resource when the client
believes that the resource does not exist.
</t>
<t>
As a special case, the value "*" matches any current entity of the
resource.
</t>
<figure><iref primary="true" item="Grammar" subitem="If-None-Match"/><artwork type="abnf2616"><![CDATA[
If-None-Match = "If-None-Match" ":" ( "*" | 1#entity-tag )
]]></artwork></figure>
<t>
If any of the entity tags match the entity tag of the entity that
would have been returned in the response to a similar GET request
(without the If-None-Match header) on that resource, or if "*" is
given and any current entity exists for that resource, then the
server MUST NOT perform the requested method, unless required to do
so because the resource's modification date fails to match that
supplied in an If-Modified-Since header field in the request.
Instead, if the request method was GET or HEAD, the server SHOULD
respond with a 304 (Not Modified) response, including the cache-related
header fields (particularly ETag) of one of the entities that
matched. For all other request methods, the server MUST respond with
a status of 412 (Precondition Failed).
</t>
<t>
See <xref target="weak.and.strong.validators"/> for rules on how to determine if two entities tags
match. The weak comparison function can only be used with GET or HEAD
requests.
</t>
<t>
If none of the entity tags match, then the server MAY perform the
requested method as if the If-None-Match header field did not exist,
but MUST also ignore any If-Modified-Since header field(s) in the
request. That is, if no entity tags match, then the server MUST NOT
return a 304 (Not Modified) response.
</t>
<t>
If the request would, without the If-None-Match header field, result
in anything other than a 2xx or 304 status, then the If-None-Match
header MUST be ignored. (See <xref target="rules.for.when.to.use.entity.tags.and.last-modified.dates"/> for a discussion of
server behavior when both If-Modified-Since and If-None-Match appear
in the same request.)
</t>
<t>
The meaning of "If-None-Match: *" is that the method MUST NOT be
performed if the representation selected by the origin server (or by
a cache, possibly using the Vary mechanism, see Section 3.5 of <xref target="Part6"/>)
exists, and SHOULD be performed if the representation does not exist.
This feature is intended to be useful in preventing races between PUT
operations.
</t>
<t>
Examples:
</t>
<figure><artwork type="example"><![CDATA[
If-None-Match: "xyzzy"
If-None-Match: W/"xyzzy"
If-None-Match: "xyzzy", "r2d2xxxx", "c3piozzzz"
If-None-Match: W/"xyzzy", W/"r2d2xxxx", W/"c3piozzzz"
If-None-Match: *
]]></artwork></figure>
<t>
The result of a request having both an If-None-Match header field and
either an If-Match or an If-Unmodified-Since header fields is
undefined by this specification.
</t>
</section>
<section title="If-Unmodified-Since" anchor="header.if-unmodified-since">
<iref primary="true" item="If-Unmodified-Since header"/>
<iref primary="true" item="Headers" subitem="If-Unmodified-Since"/>
<t>
The If-Unmodified-Since request-header field is used with a method to
make it conditional. If the requested resource has not been modified
since the time specified in this field, the server SHOULD perform the
requested operation as if the If-Unmodified-Since header were not
present.
</t>
<t>
If the requested variant has been modified since the specified time,
the server MUST NOT perform the requested operation, and MUST return
a 412 (Precondition Failed).
</t>
<figure><iref primary="true" item="Grammar" subitem="If-Unmodified-Since"/><artwork type="abnf2616"><![CDATA[
If-Unmodified-Since = "If-Unmodified-Since" ":" HTTP-date
]]></artwork></figure>
<t>
An example of the field is:
</t>
<figure><artwork type="example"><![CDATA[
If-Unmodified-Since: Sat, 29 Oct 1994 19:43:31 GMT
]]></artwork></figure>
<t>
If the request normally (i.e., without the If-Unmodified-Since
header) would result in anything other than a 2xx or 412 status, the
If-Unmodified-Since header SHOULD be ignored.
</t>
<t>
If the specified date is invalid, the header is ignored.
</t>
<t>
The result of a request having both an If-Unmodified-Since header
field and either an If-None-Match or an If-Modified-Since header
fields is undefined by this specification.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Last-Modified" anchor="header.last-modified">
<iref primary="true" item="Last-Modified header"/>
<iref primary="true" item="Headers" subitem="Last-Modified"/>
<t>
The Last-Modified entity-header field indicates the date and time at
which the origin server believes the variant was last modified.
</t>
<figure><iref primary="true" item="Grammar" subitem="Last-Modified"/><artwork type="abnf2616"><![CDATA[
Last-Modified = "Last-Modified" ":" HTTP-date
]]></artwork></figure>
<t>
An example of its use is
</t>
<figure><artwork type="example"><![CDATA[
Last-Modified: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 12:45:26 GMT
]]></artwork></figure>
<t>
The exact meaning of this header field depends on the implementation
of the origin server and the nature of the original resource. For
files, it may be just the file system last-modified time. For
entities with dynamically included parts, it may be the most recent
of the set of last-modify times for its component parts. For database
gateways, it may be the last-update time stamp of the record. For
virtual objects, it may be the last time the internal state changed.
</t>
<t>
An origin server MUST NOT send a Last-Modified date which is later
than the server's time of message origination. In such cases, where
the resource's last modification would indicate some time in the
future, the server MUST replace that date with the message
origination date.
</t>
<t>
An origin server SHOULD obtain the Last-Modified value of the entity
as close as possible to the time that it generates the Date value of
its response. This allows a recipient to make an accurate assessment
of the entity's modification time, especially if the entity changes
near the time that the response is generated.
</t>
<t>
HTTP/1.1 servers SHOULD send Last-Modified whenever feasible.
</t>
</section>
</section>
<section title="IANA Considerations" anchor="IANA.considerations">
<t>
TBD.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Security Considerations" anchor="security.considerations">
<t>
No additional security considerations have been identified beyond
those applicable to HTTP in general <xref target="Part1"/>.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Acknowledgments" anchor="ack">
<t>
Based on an XML translation of RFC 2616 by Julian Reschke.
</t>
</section>
</middle>
<back>
<references>
<reference anchor="Part1">
<front>
<title abbrev="HTTP/1.1">HTTP/1.1, part 1: URIs, Connections, and Message Parsing</title>
<author initials="R." surname="Fielding" fullname="Roy T. Fielding" role="editor">
<organization abbrev="Day Software">Day Software</organization>
<address><email>fielding@gbiv.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Gettys" fullname="Jim Gettys">
<organization>One Laptop per Child</organization>
<address><email>jg@laptop.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Mogul" fullname="Jeffrey C. Mogul">
<organization abbrev="HP">Hewlett-Packard Company</organization>
<address><email>JeffMogul@acm.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="H." surname="Frystyk" fullname="Henrik Frystyk Nielsen">
<organization abbrev="Microsoft">Microsoft Corporation</organization>
<address><email>henrikn@microsoft.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="L." surname="Masinter" fullname="Larry Masinter">
<organization abbrev="Adobe Systems">Adobe Systems, Incorporated</organization>
<address><email>LMM@acm.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="P." surname="Leach" fullname="Paul J. Leach">
<organization abbrev="Microsoft">Microsoft Corporation</organization>
<address><email>paulle@microsoft.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="T." surname="Berners-Lee" fullname="Tim Berners-Lee">
<organization abbrev="W3C/MIT">World Wide Web Consortium</organization>
<address><email>timbl@w3.org</email></address>
</author>
<date month="December" year="2007"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-00"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="Part5">
<front>
<title abbrev="HTTP/1.1">HTTP/1.1, part 5: Range Requests and Partial Responses</title>
<author initials="R." surname="Fielding" fullname="Roy T. Fielding" role="editor">
<organization abbrev="Day Software">Day Software</organization>
<address><email>fielding@gbiv.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Gettys" fullname="Jim Gettys">
<organization>One Laptop per Child</organization>
<address><email>jg@laptop.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Mogul" fullname="Jeffrey C. Mogul">
<organization abbrev="HP">Hewlett-Packard Company</organization>
<address><email>JeffMogul@acm.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="H." surname="Frystyk" fullname="Henrik Frystyk Nielsen">
<organization abbrev="Microsoft">Microsoft Corporation</organization>
<address><email>henrikn@microsoft.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="L." surname="Masinter" fullname="Larry Masinter">
<organization abbrev="Adobe Systems">Adobe Systems, Incorporated</organization>
<address><email>LMM@acm.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="P." surname="Leach" fullname="Paul J. Leach">
<organization abbrev="Microsoft">Microsoft Corporation</organization>
<address><email>paulle@microsoft.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="T." surname="Berners-Lee" fullname="Tim Berners-Lee">
<organization abbrev="W3C/MIT">World Wide Web Consortium</organization>
<address><email>timbl@w3.org</email></address>
</author>
<date month="December" year="2007"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-00"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="Part6">
<front>
<title abbrev="HTTP/1.1">HTTP/1.1, part 6: Caching</title>
<author initials="R." surname="Fielding" fullname="Roy T. Fielding" role="editor">
<organization abbrev="Day Software">Day Software</organization>
<address><email>fielding@gbiv.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Gettys" fullname="Jim Gettys">
<organization>One Laptop per Child</organization>
<address><email>jg@laptop.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Mogul" fullname="Jeffrey C. Mogul">
<organization abbrev="HP">Hewlett-Packard Company</organization>
<address><email>JeffMogul@acm.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="H." surname="Frystyk" fullname="Henrik Frystyk Nielsen">
<organization abbrev="Microsoft">Microsoft Corporation</organization>
<address><email>henrikn@microsoft.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="L." surname="Masinter" fullname="Larry Masinter">
<organization abbrev="Adobe Systems">Adobe Systems, Incorporated</organization>
<address><email>LMM@acm.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="P." surname="Leach" fullname="Paul J. Leach">
<organization abbrev="Microsoft">Microsoft Corporation</organization>
<address><email>paulle@microsoft.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="T." surname="Berners-Lee" fullname="Tim Berners-Lee">
<organization abbrev="W3C/MIT">World Wide Web Consortium</organization>
<address><email>timbl@w3.org</email></address>
</author>
<date month="December" year="2007"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-00"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="RFC2616">
<front>
<title>Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1</title>
<author initials="R." surname="Fielding" fullname="R. Fielding">
<organization>University of California, Irvine</organization>
<address><email>fielding@ics.uci.edu</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Gettys" fullname="J. Gettys">
<organization>W3C</organization>
<address><email>jg@w3.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Mogul" fullname="J. Mogul">
<organization>Compaq Computer Corporation</organization>
<address><email>mogul@wrl.dec.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="H." surname="Frystyk" fullname="H. Frystyk">
<organization>MIT Laboratory for Computer Science</organization>
<address><email>frystyk@w3.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="L." surname="Masinter" fullname="L. Masinter">
<organization>Xerox Corporation</organization>
<address><email>masinter@parc.xerox.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="P." surname="Leach" fullname="P. Leach">
<organization>Microsoft Corporation</organization>
<address><email>paulle@microsoft.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="T." surname="Berners-Lee" fullname="T. Berners-Lee">
<organization>W3C</organization>
<address><email>timbl@w3.org</email></address>
</author>
<date month="June" year="1999"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2616"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="RFC2068">
<front>
<title abbrev="HTTP/1.1">Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1</title>
<author initials="R." surname="Fielding" fullname="Roy T. Fielding">
<organization>University of California, Irvine, Department of Information and Computer Science</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street/>
<city>Irvine</city>
<region>CA</region>
<code>92717-3425</code>
<country>US</country></postal>
<facsimile>+1 714 824 4056</facsimile>
<email>fielding@ics.uci.edu</email></address></author>
<author initials="J." surname="Gettys" fullname="Jim Gettys">
<organization>MIT Laboratory for Computer Science</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>545 Technology Square</street>
<city>Cambridge</city>
<region>MA</region>
<code>02139</code>
<country>US</country></postal>
<facsimile>+1 617 258 8682</facsimile>
<email>jg@w3.org</email></address></author>
<author initials="J." surname="Mogul" fullname="Jeffrey C. Mogul">
<organization>Digital Equipment Corporation, Western Research Laboratory</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>250 University Avenue</street>
<city>Palo Alto</city>
<region>CA</region>
<code>94301</code>
<country>US</country></postal>
<email>mogul@wrl.dec.com</email></address></author>
<author initials="H." surname="Nielsen" fullname="Henrik Frystyk Nielsen">
<organization>MIT Laboratory for Computer Science</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>545 Technology Square</street>
<city>Cambridge</city>
<region>MA</region>
<code>02139</code>
<country>US</country></postal>
<facsimile>+1 617 258 8682</facsimile>
<email>frystyk@w3.org</email></address></author>
<author initials="T." surname="Berners-Lee" fullname="Tim Berners-Lee">
<organization>MIT Laboratory for Computer Science</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>545 Technology Square</street>
<city>Cambridge</city>
<region>MA</region>
<code>02139</code>
<country>US</country></postal>
<facsimile>+1 617 258 8682</facsimile>
<email>timbl@w3.org</email></address></author>
<date month="January" year="1997"/>
<abstract>
<t>The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is an application-level protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypermedia information systems. It is a generic, stateless, object-oriented protocol which can be used for many tasks, such as name servers and distributed object management systems, through extension of its request methods. A feature of HTTP is the typing and negotiation of data representation, allowing systems to be built independently of the data being transferred.</t>
<t>HTTP has been in use by the World-Wide Web global information initiative since 1990. This specification defines the protocol referred to as "HTTP/1.1".</t></abstract></front>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2068"/>
</reference>
</references>
</back>
</rfc>| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-24 01:18:21 |