idnits 2.17.1 draft-hallam-http-logfile-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Cannot find the required boilerplate sections (Copyright, IPR, etc.) in this document. Expected boilerplate is as follows today (2024-04-23) according to https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info : IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.a: This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 2: Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 3: 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. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Missing expiration date. The document expiration date should appear on the first and last page. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about Internet-Drafts being working documents. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about 6 months document validity. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of current Internet-Drafts. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of Shadow Directories. == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but there was 8 longer pages, the longest (page 2) being 59 lines Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section. ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) ** There are 4 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 6 characters in excess of 72. ** There are 11 instances of lines with control characters in the document. ** The abstract seems to contain references ([Luotonen95], [Hallam96a], [Hallam96b], [RFC1738], [RFC1808]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Line 111 has weird spacing: '...cribing sessi...' -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (February 1996) is 10295 days in the past. Is this intentional? -- Found something which looks like a code comment -- if you have code sections in the document, please surround them with '' and '' lines. Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Missing reference section? 'Hallam96a' on line 411 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? 'Hallam96b' on line 415 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? 'RFC1808' on line 400 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? 'RFC1738' on line 403 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? 'Luotonen95' on line 407 looks like a reference Summary: 11 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 8 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 INTERNET DRAFT Phillip M. Hallam-Baker, W3C 2 Expires in six months email: 3 Brian Behlendorf 4 email: 5 21st February 1996 7 Extended Log File Format 9 11 Status of this Memo 13 This document is an Internet draft. Internet drafts are working 14 documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas 15 and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute 16 working information as Internet drafts. 18 Internet Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six 19 months and can be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents 20 at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet drafts as reference 21 material or to cite them as other than as "work in progress". 23 To learn the current status of any Internet draft please check the 24 "lid-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet drafts shadow 25 directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), nic.nordu.net (Europe), 26 munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim), ds.internic.net (US East coast) or 27 ftp.isi.edu (US West coast). Further information about the IETF can 28 be found at URL: http://www.cnri.reston.va.us/ 30 Distribution of this document is unlimited. Please send comments to 31 the HTTP working group (HTTP-WG) of the Internet Engineering Task 32 Force (IETF) at < http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/http/. This note 33 is also avaliable as a World Wide Web Consortium Working Draft 34 WD-logfile-960221, archived at 35 http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/TR/WD-logfile-960221.html 37 Extended Log File Format 39 WD-logfile-960221 41 Extended Log File Format 43 W3C Working Draft _WD-logfile-960221_ 45 This version: 46 http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/TR/WD-logfile-960221.html 48 Latest version: 49 http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/TR/WD-logfile.html 51 Authors: 52 Phillip M. Hallam-Baker 54 Extended Log File Format 56 Brian Behlendorf 58 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 59 Status of this document 61 This is a W3C Working Draft for review by W3C members and other 62 interested parties. It is a draft document and may be updated, 63 replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is 64 inappropriate to use W3C Working Drafts as reference material or to 65 cite them as other than "work in progress". A list of current W3C 66 working drafts can be found at: http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/TR 68 Note: since working drafts are subject to frequent change, you are 69 advised to reference the above URL, rather than the URLs for working 70 drafts themselves. 72 Extended Log File Format 74 Abstract 76 An improved format for Web server log files is presented. The format 77 is extensible, permitting a wider range of data to be captured. This 78 proposal is motivated by the need to capture a wider range of data 79 for demographic analysis and also the needs of proxy caches. 81 Introduction 83 Most Web servers offer the option to store logfiles in either the 84 common log format or a proprietary format. The common log file 85 format is supported by the majority of analysis tools but the 86 information about each server transaction is fixed. In many cases it 87 is desirable to record more information. Sites sensitive to personal 88 data issues may wish to omit the recording of certain data. In 89 addition ambiguities arise in analysing the common log file format 90 since field separator characters may in some cases occur within 91 fields. The extended log file format is designed to meet the 92 following needs: 94 * Permit control over the data recorded. 96 * Support needs of proxies, clients and servers in a common format 98 * Provide robust handling of character escaping issues 100 * Allow exchange of demographic data. 102 * Allow summary data to be expressed. 104 The log file format described permits customized logfiles to be 105 recorded in a format readable by generic analysis tools. A header 106 specifying the data types recorded is written out at the start of 107 each log. 109 This work is in part motivated by the need to support collection of 110 demographic data. This work is discussed at greater length in 111 companion drafts describing session identifier URIs [Hallam96a] and 112 more consistent proxy behaviour [Hallam96b]. 114 Format 116 A extended log file contains a sequence of _lines_ containing ASCII 117 characters terminated by either the sequence CR or CRLF. Log file 118 generators should follow the line termination convention for the 119 platform on which they are executed. Analysers should accept either 120 form. Each line may contain either a _directive_ or an _entry_. 122 Entries consist of a sequence of _fields_ relating to a single HTTP 123 transaction. Fields are separated by whitespace, the use of tab 124 characters for this purpose is encouraged. If a field is unused in a 125 particular entry dash "-" marks the omitted field. Directives record 126 information about the logging process itself. 128 Extended Log File Format 130 The following directives are defined: 132 Version: __.__ 133 The version of the extended log file format used. This draft 134 defines version 1.0. 136 Fields: [__...] 137 Specifies the fields recorded in the log. 139 Software: _string_ 140 Identifies the software which generated the log. 142 Start-Date: __ _