< draft-nottingham-http-problem-06.txt		draft-nottingham-http-problem-07.txt >
	Network Working Group M. Nottingham		Network Working Group M. Nottingham
	Internet-Draft Akamai		Internet-Draft Akamai
	Intended status: Informational E. Wilde		Intended status: Informational E. Wilde
	Expires: August 5, 2014 UC Berkeley		Expires: January 29, 2015 UC Berkeley
	February 1, 2014		July 28, 2014
	Problem Details for HTTP APIs		Problem Details for HTTP APIs
	draft-nottingham-http-problem-06		draft-nottingham-http-problem-07
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document defines a "problem detail" as a way to carry machine-		This document defines a "problem detail" as a way to carry machine-
	readable details of errors in a HTTP response, to avoid the need to		readable details of errors in a HTTP response, to avoid the need to
	invent new error response formats for HTTP APIs.		invent new error response formats for HTTP APIs.
	Note to Readers		Note to Readers
	This draft should be discussed on the apps-discuss mailing list [1].		This draft should be discussed on the apps-discuss mailing list [1].
	Status of this Memo		Status of This Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the		This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
	provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.		provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on August 5, 2014.		This Internet-Draft will expire on January 29, 2015.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
	to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must		to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
	include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of		include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
	the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as		the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
	described in the Simplified BSD License.		described in the Simplified BSD License.
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	2. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		2. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3. The Problem Details JSON Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		3. The Problem Details JSON Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3.1. Problem Details Object Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		3.1. Problem Details Object Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	3.2. Extension Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		3.2. Extension Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	4. Defining New Problem Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		4. Defining New Problem Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	4.1. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		4.1. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	4.2. Pre-Defined Problem Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		4.2. Pre-Defined Problem Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	Appendix A. HTTP Problems and XML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		Appendix A. HTTP Problems and XML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	Appendix B. Using Problem Details with Other Formats . . . . . . 12		Appendix B. Using Problem Details with Other Formats . . . . . . 12
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	HTTP [RFC2616] status codes are sometimes not sufficient to convey		HTTP [RFC2616] status codes are sometimes not sufficient to convey
	enough information about an error to be helpful. While humans behind		enough information about an error to be helpful. While humans behind
	Web browsers can be informed about the nature of the problem with an		Web browsers can be informed about the nature of the problem with an
	HTML [W3C.REC-html401-19991224] response body, non-human consumers of		HTML [W3C.REC-html401-19991224] response body, non-human consumers of
	so-called "HTTP APIs" are usually not.		so-called "HTTP APIs" are usually not.
	This specification defines simple JSON [RFC4627] and XML		This specification defines simple JSON [RFC4627] and XML
	skipping to change at page 10, line 18 ¶		skipping to change at page 9, line 43 ¶
	8.1. Normative References		8.1. Normative References
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
	[RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H.,		[RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H.,
	Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext		Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext
	Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.		Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.
	[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform		[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
	Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,		Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC
	RFC 3986, January 2005.		3986, January 2005.
	[RFC4627] Crockford, D., "The application/json Media Type for		[RFC4627] Crockford, D., "The application/json Media Type for
	JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)", RFC 4627, July 2006.		JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)", RFC 4627, July 2006.
	[RFC5234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax		[RFC5234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
	Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008.		Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008.
	8.2. Informative References		8.2. Informative References
	[ISO-19757-2]		[ISO-19757-2]
	International Organization for Standardization,		International Organization for Standardization,
	"Information Technology --- Document Schema Definition		"Information Technology --- Document Schema Definition
	Languages (DSDL) --- Part 2: Grammar-based Validation ---		Languages (DSDL) --- Part 2: Grammar-based Validation ---
	RELAX NG", ISO/IEC 19757-2, 2003.		RELAX NG", ISO/IEC 19757-2, 2003.
	[RFC3023] Murata, M., St. Laurent, S., and D. Kohn, "XML Media		[RFC3023] Murata, M., St. Laurent, S., and D. Kohn, "XML Media
	Types", RFC 3023, January 2001.		Types", RFC 3023, January 2001.
	[RFC5988] Nottingham, M., "Web Linking", RFC 5988, October 2010.		[RFC5988] Nottingham, M., "Web Linking", RFC 5988, October 2010.
	[RFC6694] Moonesamy, S., "The "about" URI Scheme", RFC 6694,		[RFC6694] Moonesamy, S., "The "about" URI Scheme", RFC 6694, August
	August 2012.		2012.
	[RFC6838] Freed, N., Klensin, J., and T. Hansen, "Media Type		[RFC6838] Freed, N., Klensin, J., and T. Hansen, "Media Type
	Specifications and Registration Procedures", BCP 13,		Specifications and Registration Procedures", BCP 13, RFC
	RFC 6838, January 2013.		6838, January 2013.
	[W3C.REC-html401-19991224]		[W3C.REC-html401-19991224]
	Hors, A., Raggett, D., and I. Jacobs, "HTML 4.01		Raggett, D., Hors, A., and I. Jacobs, "HTML 4.01
	Specification", World Wide Web Consortium		Specification", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation
	Recommendation REC-html401-19991224, December 1999,		REC-html401-19991224, December 1999,
	<http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224>.		<http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224>.
	[W3C.REC-rdfa-core-20120607]		[W3C.REC-rdfa-core-20120607]
	Adida, B., Birbeck, M., McCarron, S., and I. Herman, "RDFa		Adida, B., Birbeck, M., McCarron, S., and I. Herman, "RDFa
	Core 1.1", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-		Core 1.1", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-
	rdfa-core-20120607, June 2012,		rdfa-core-20120607, June 2012,
	<http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-rdfa-core-20120607>.		<http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-rdfa-core-20120607>.
	[W3C.REC-xml-20081126]		[W3C.REC-xml-20081126]
	Yergeau, F., Maler, E., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C.,		Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, M., Maler, E., and
	and T. Bray, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fifth		F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fifth
	Edition)", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-		Edition)", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-
	xml-20081126, November 2008,		xml-20081126, November 2008,
	<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126>.		<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126>.
	URIs
	[1] <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>
	Appendix A. HTTP Problems and XML		Appendix A. HTTP Problems and XML
	Some HTTP-based APIs use XML [W3C.REC-xml-20081126] as their primary		Some HTTP-based APIs use XML [W3C.REC-xml-20081126] as their primary
	format convention. Such APIs MAY express problem details using the		format convention. Such APIs MAY express problem details using the
	format defined in this appendix.		format defined in this appendix.
	The OPTIONAL RELAX NG schema [ISO-19757-2] for the XML format is:		The OPTIONAL RELAX NG schema [ISO-19757-2] for the XML format is:
	default namespace ns = "urn:ietf:rfc:XXXX"		default namespace ns = "urn:ietf:rfc:XXXX"
End of changes. 11 change blocks.
	37 lines changed or deleted		33 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/