idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-07.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a License Notice according IETF Trust Provisions of 28 Dec 2009, Section 6.b.i or Provisions of 12 Sep 2009 Section 6.b -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? (You're using the IETF Trust Provisions' Section 6.b License Notice from 12 Feb 2009 rather than one of the newer Notices. See https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/.) Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC2617, but the abstract doesn't seem to mention this, which it should. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year (Using the creation date from RFC2617, updated by this document, for RFC5378 checks: 1997-12-01) -- The document seems to contain a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, and may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. The disclaimer is necessary when there are original authors that you have been unable to contact, or if some do not wish to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust. If you are able to get all authors (current and original) to grant those rights, you can and should remove the disclaimer; otherwise, the disclaimer is needed and you can ignore this comment. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (July 13, 2009) is 5400 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Outdated reference: A later version (-26) exists of draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-07 == Outdated reference: A later version (-26) exists of draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-07 ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2617 (Obsoleted by RFC 7235, RFC 7615, RFC 7616, RFC 7617) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2616 (Obsoleted by RFC 7230, RFC 7231, RFC 7232, RFC 7233, RFC 7234, RFC 7235) Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 4 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 HTTPbis Working Group R. Fielding, Ed. 3 Internet-Draft Day Software 4 Obsoletes: 2616 (if approved) J. Gettys 5 Updates: 2617 (if approved) One Laptop per Child 6 Intended status: Standards Track J. Mogul 7 Expires: January 14, 2010 HP 8 H. Frystyk 9 Microsoft 10 L. Masinter 11 Adobe Systems 12 P. Leach 13 Microsoft 14 T. Berners-Lee 15 W3C/MIT 16 Y. Lafon, Ed. 17 W3C 18 J. Reschke, Ed. 19 greenbytes 20 July 13, 2009 22 HTTP/1.1, part 7: Authentication 23 draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-07 25 Status of this Memo 27 This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the 28 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may contain material 29 from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly 30 available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the 31 copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF 32 Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the 33 IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from 34 the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this 35 document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and 36 derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards 37 Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to 38 translate it into languages other than English. 40 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 41 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 42 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 43 Drafts. 45 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 46 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 47 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 48 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 49 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 50 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 52 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 53 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 55 This Internet-Draft will expire on January 14, 2010. 57 Copyright Notice 59 Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 60 document authors. All rights reserved. 62 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 63 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of 64 publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). 65 Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights 66 and restrictions with respect to this document. 68 Abstract 70 The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is an application-level 71 protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypermedia information 72 systems. HTTP has been in use by the World Wide Web global 73 information initiative since 1990. This document is Part 7 of the 74 seven-part specification that defines the protocol referred to as 75 "HTTP/1.1" and, taken together, obsoletes RFC 2616. Part 7 defines 76 HTTP Authentication. 78 Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor) 80 Discussion of this draft should take place on the HTTPBIS working 81 group mailing list (ietf-http-wg@w3.org). The current issues list is 82 at and related 83 documents (including fancy diffs) can be found at 84 . 86 The changes in this draft are summarized in Appendix C.8. 88 Table of Contents 90 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 91 1.1. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 92 1.2. Syntax Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 93 1.2.1. Core Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 94 1.2.2. ABNF Rules defined in other Parts of the 95 Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 96 2. Status Code Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 97 2.1. 401 Unauthorized . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 98 2.2. 407 Proxy Authentication Required . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 99 3. Header Field Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 100 3.1. Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 101 3.2. Proxy-Authenticate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 102 3.3. Proxy-Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 103 3.4. WWW-Authenticate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 104 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 105 4.1. Message Header Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 106 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 107 5.1. Authentication Credentials and Idle Clients . . . . . . . 8 108 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 109 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 110 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 111 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 112 Appendix A. Compatibility with Previous Versions . . . . . . . . 10 113 A.1. Changes from RFC 2616 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 114 Appendix B. Collected ABNF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 115 Appendix C. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before 116 publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 117 C.1. Since RFC2616 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 118 C.2. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-00 . . . . . . . . . . . 11 119 C.3. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-01 . . . . . . . . . . . 11 120 C.4. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-02 . . . . . . . . . . . 11 121 C.5. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-03 . . . . . . . . . . . 11 122 C.6. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-04 . . . . . . . . . . . 11 123 C.7. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-05 . . . . . . . . . . . 12 124 C.8. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-06 . . . . . . . . . . . 12 125 Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 126 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 128 1. Introduction 130 This document defines HTTP/1.1 access control and authentication. 131 Right now it includes the extracted relevant sections of RFC 2616 132 with only minor changes. The intention is to move the general 133 framework for HTTP authentication here, as currently specified in 134 [RFC2617], and allow the individual authentication mechanisms to be 135 defined elsewhere. This introduction will be rewritten when that 136 occurs. 138 HTTP provides several OPTIONAL challenge-response authentication 139 mechanisms which can be used by a server to challenge a client 140 request and by a client to provide authentication information. The 141 general framework for access authentication, and the specification of 142 "basic" and "digest" authentication, are specified in "HTTP 143 Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication" [RFC2617]. 144 This specification adopts the definitions of "challenge" and 145 "credentials" from that specification. 147 1.1. Requirements 149 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 150 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 151 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 153 An implementation is not compliant if it fails to satisfy one or more 154 of the MUST or REQUIRED level requirements for the protocols it 155 implements. An implementation that satisfies all the MUST or 156 REQUIRED level and all the SHOULD level requirements for its 157 protocols is said to be "unconditionally compliant"; one that 158 satisfies all the MUST level requirements but not all the SHOULD 159 level requirements for its protocols is said to be "conditionally 160 compliant." 162 1.2. Syntax Notation 164 This specification uses the ABNF syntax defined in Section 1.2 of 165 [Part1] (which extends the syntax defined in [RFC5234] with a list 166 rule). Appendix B shows the collected ABNF, with the list rule 167 expanded. 169 The following core rules are included by reference, as defined in 170 [RFC5234], Appendix B.1: ALPHA (letters), CR (carriage return), CRLF 171 (CR LF), CTL (controls), DIGIT (decimal 0-9), DQUOTE (double quote), 172 HEXDIG (hexadecimal 0-9/A-F/a-f), LF (line feed), OCTET (any 8-bit 173 sequence of data), SP (space), VCHAR (any visible USASCII character), 174 and WSP (whitespace). 176 1.2.1. Core Rules 178 The core rules below are defined in Section 1.2.2 of [Part1]: 180 OWS = 182 1.2.2. ABNF Rules defined in other Parts of the Specification 184 The ABNF rules below are defined in other specifications: 186 challenge = 187 credentials = 189 2. Status Code Definitions 191 2.1. 401 Unauthorized 193 The request requires user authentication. The response MUST include 194 a WWW-Authenticate header field (Section 3.4) containing a challenge 195 applicable to the requested resource. The client MAY repeat the 196 request with a suitable Authorization header field (Section 3.1). If 197 the request already included Authorization credentials, then the 401 198 response indicates that authorization has been refused for those 199 credentials. If the 401 response contains the same challenge as the 200 prior response, and the user agent has already attempted 201 authentication at least once, then the user SHOULD be presented the 202 entity that was given in the response, since that entity might 203 include relevant diagnostic information. HTTP access authentication 204 is explained in "HTTP Authentication: Basic and Digest Access 205 Authentication" [RFC2617]. 207 2.2. 407 Proxy Authentication Required 209 This code is similar to 401 (Unauthorized), but indicates that the 210 client must first authenticate itself with the proxy. The proxy MUST 211 return a Proxy-Authenticate header field (Section 3.2) containing a 212 challenge applicable to the proxy for the requested resource. The 213 client MAY repeat the request with a suitable Proxy-Authorization 214 header field (Section 3.3). HTTP access authentication is explained 215 in "HTTP Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication" 216 [RFC2617]. 218 3. Header Field Definitions 220 This section defines the syntax and semantics of HTTP/1.1 header 221 fields related to authentication. 223 3.1. Authorization 225 A user agent that wishes to authenticate itself with a server-- 226 usually, but not necessarily, after receiving a 401 response--does so 227 by including an Authorization request-header field with the request. 228 The field "Authorization" consists of credentials containing the 229 authentication information of the user agent for the realm of the 230 resource being requested. 232 Authorization = "Authorization" ":" OWS Authorization-v 233 Authorization-v = credentials 235 HTTP access authentication is described in "HTTP Authentication: 236 Basic and Digest Access Authentication" [RFC2617]. If a request is 237 authenticated and a realm specified, the same credentials SHOULD be 238 valid for all other requests within this realm (assuming that the 239 authentication scheme itself does not require otherwise, such as 240 credentials that vary according to a challenge value or using 241 synchronized clocks). 243 When a shared cache (see Section 1.2 of [Part6]) receives a request 244 containing an Authorization field, it MUST NOT return the 245 corresponding response as a reply to any other request, unless one of 246 the following specific exceptions holds: 248 1. If the response includes the "s-maxage" cache-control directive, 249 the cache MAY use that response in replying to a subsequent 250 request. But (if the specified maximum age has passed) a proxy 251 cache MUST first revalidate it with the origin server, using the 252 request-headers from the new request to allow the origin server 253 to authenticate the new request. (This is the defined behavior 254 for s-maxage.) If the response includes "s-maxage=0", the proxy 255 MUST always revalidate it before re-using it. 257 2. If the response includes the "must-revalidate" cache-control 258 directive, the cache MAY use that response in replying to a 259 subsequent request. But if the response is stale, all caches 260 MUST first revalidate it with the origin server, using the 261 request-headers from the new request to allow the origin server 262 to authenticate the new request. 264 3. If the response includes the "public" cache-control directive, it 265 MAY be returned in reply to any subsequent request. 267 3.2. Proxy-Authenticate 269 The response-header field "Proxy-Authenticate" MUST be included as 270 part of a 407 (Proxy Authentication Required) response. The field 271 value consists of a challenge that indicates the authentication 272 scheme and parameters applicable to the proxy for this request- 273 target. 275 Proxy-Authenticate = "Proxy-Authenticate" ":" OWS 276 Proxy-Authenticate-v 277 Proxy-Authenticate-v = 1#challenge 279 The HTTP access authentication process is described in "HTTP 280 Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication" [RFC2617]. 281 Unlike WWW-Authenticate, the Proxy-Authenticate header field applies 282 only to the current connection and SHOULD NOT be passed on to 283 downstream clients. However, an intermediate proxy might need to 284 obtain its own credentials by requesting them from the downstream 285 client, which in some circumstances will appear as if the proxy is 286 forwarding the Proxy-Authenticate header field. 288 3.3. Proxy-Authorization 290 The request-header field "Proxy-Authorization" allows the client to 291 identify itself (or its user) to a proxy which requires 292 authentication. The Proxy-Authorization field value consists of 293 credentials containing the authentication information of the user 294 agent for the proxy and/or realm of the resource being requested. 296 Proxy-Authorization = "Proxy-Authorization" ":" OWS 297 Proxy-Authorization-v 298 Proxy-Authorization-v = credentials 300 The HTTP access authentication process is described in "HTTP 301 Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication" [RFC2617]. 302 Unlike Authorization, the Proxy-Authorization header field applies 303 only to the next outbound proxy that demanded authentication using 304 the Proxy-Authenticate field. When multiple proxies are used in a 305 chain, the Proxy-Authorization header field is consumed by the first 306 outbound proxy that was expecting to receive credentials. A proxy 307 MAY relay the credentials from the client request to the next proxy 308 if that is the mechanism by which the proxies cooperatively 309 authenticate a given request. 311 3.4. WWW-Authenticate 313 The WWW-Authenticate response-header field MUST be included in 401 314 (Unauthorized) response messages. The field value consists of at 315 least one challenge that indicates the authentication scheme(s) and 316 parameters applicable to the request-target. 318 WWW-Authenticate = "WWW-Authenticate" ":" OWS WWW-Authenticate-v 319 WWW-Authenticate-v = 1#challenge 321 The HTTP access authentication process is described in "HTTP 322 Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication" [RFC2617]. 323 User agents are advised to take special care in parsing the WWW- 324 Authenticate field value as it might contain more than one challenge, 325 or if more than one WWW-Authenticate header field is provided, the 326 contents of a challenge itself can contain a comma-separated list of 327 authentication parameters. 329 4. IANA Considerations 331 4.1. Message Header Registration 333 The Message Header Registry located at should be 335 updated with the permanent registrations below (see [RFC3864]): 337 +---------------------+----------+----------+-------------+ 338 | Header Field Name | Protocol | Status | Reference | 339 +---------------------+----------+----------+-------------+ 340 | Authorization | http | standard | Section 3.1 | 341 | Proxy-Authenticate | http | standard | Section 3.2 | 342 | Proxy-Authorization | http | standard | Section 3.3 | 343 | WWW-Authenticate | http | standard | Section 3.4 | 344 +---------------------+----------+----------+-------------+ 346 The change controller is: "IETF (iesg@ietf.org) - Internet 347 Engineering Task Force". 349 5. Security Considerations 351 This section is meant to inform application developers, information 352 providers, and users of the security limitations in HTTP/1.1 as 353 described by this document. The discussion does not include 354 definitive solutions to the problems revealed, though it does make 355 some suggestions for reducing security risks. 357 5.1. Authentication Credentials and Idle Clients 359 Existing HTTP clients and user agents typically retain authentication 360 information indefinitely. HTTP/1.1 does not provide a method for a 361 server to direct clients to discard these cached credentials. This 362 is a significant defect that requires further extensions to HTTP. 363 Circumstances under which credential caching can interfere with the 364 application's security model include but are not limited to: 366 o Clients which have been idle for an extended period following 367 which the server might wish to cause the client to reprompt the 368 user for credentials. 370 o Applications which include a session termination indication (such 371 as a `logout' or `commit' button on a page) after which the server 372 side of the application `knows' that there is no further reason 373 for the client to retain the credentials. 375 This is currently under separate study. There are a number of work- 376 arounds to parts of this problem, and we encourage the use of 377 password protection in screen savers, idle time-outs, and other 378 methods which mitigate the security problems inherent in this 379 problem. In particular, user agents which cache credentials are 380 encouraged to provide a readily accessible mechanism for discarding 381 cached credentials under user control. 383 6. Acknowledgments 385 [[anchor2: TBD.]] 387 7. References 389 7.1. Normative References 391 [Part1] Fielding, R., Ed., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., 392 Masinter, L., Leach, P., Berners-Lee, T., Lafon, Y., Ed., 393 and J. Reschke, Ed., "HTTP/1.1, part 1: URIs, Connections, 394 and Message Parsing", draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-07 395 (work in progress), July 2009. 397 [Part6] Fielding, R., Ed., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., 398 Masinter, L., Leach, P., Berners-Lee, T., Lafon, Y., Ed., 399 Nottingham, M., Ed., and J. Reschke, Ed., "HTTP/1.1, part 400 6: Caching", draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-07 (work in 401 progress), July 2009. 403 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 404 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 406 [RFC2617] Franks, J., Hallam-Baker, P., Hostetler, J., Lawrence, S., 407 Leach, P., Luotonen, A., and L. Stewart, "HTTP 408 Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication", 409 RFC 2617, June 1999. 411 [RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax 412 Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008. 414 7.2. Informative References 416 [RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., 417 Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext 418 Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999. 420 [RFC3864] Klyne, G., Nottingham, M., and J. Mogul, "Registration 421 Procedures for Message Header Fields", BCP 90, RFC 3864, 422 September 2004. 424 Appendix A. Compatibility with Previous Versions 426 A.1. Changes from RFC 2616 428 Appendix B. Collected ABNF 430 Authorization = "Authorization:" OWS Authorization-v 431 Authorization-v = credentials 433 OWS = 435 Proxy-Authenticate = "Proxy-Authenticate:" OWS Proxy-Authenticate-v 436 Proxy-Authenticate-v = *( "," OWS ) challenge *( OWS "," [ OWS 437 challenge ] ) 438 Proxy-Authorization = "Proxy-Authorization:" OWS 439 Proxy-Authorization-v 440 Proxy-Authorization-v = credentials 442 WWW-Authenticate = "WWW-Authenticate:" OWS WWW-Authenticate-v 443 WWW-Authenticate-v = *( "," OWS ) challenge *( OWS "," [ OWS 444 challenge ] ) 446 challenge = 447 credentials = 448 ABNF diagnostics: 450 ; Authorization defined but not used 451 ; Proxy-Authenticate defined but not used 452 ; Proxy-Authorization defined but not used 453 ; WWW-Authenticate defined but not used 455 Appendix C. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication) 457 C.1. Since RFC2616 459 Extracted relevant partitions from [RFC2616]. 461 C.2. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-00 463 Closed issues: 465 o : "Normative and 466 Informative references" 468 C.3. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-01 470 Ongoing work on ABNF conversion 471 (): 473 o Explicitly import BNF rules for "challenge" and "credentials" from 474 RFC2617. 476 o Add explicit references to BNF syntax and rules imported from 477 other parts of the specification. 479 C.4. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-02 481 Ongoing work on IANA Message Header Registration 482 (): 484 o Reference RFC 3984, and update header registrations for headers 485 defined in this document. 487 C.5. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-03 489 C.6. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-04 491 Ongoing work on ABNF conversion 492 (): 494 o Use "/" instead of "|" for alternatives. 496 o Introduce new ABNF rules for "bad" whitespace ("BWS"), optional 497 whitespace ("OWS") and required whitespace ("RWS"). 499 o Rewrite ABNFs to spell out whitespace rules, factor out header 500 value format definitions. 502 C.7. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-05 504 Final work on ABNF conversion 505 (): 507 o Add appendix containing collected and expanded ABNF, reorganize 508 ABNF introduction. 510 C.8. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-06 512 None. 514 Index 516 4 517 401 Unauthorized (status code) 5 518 407 Proxy Authentication Required (status code) 5 520 A 521 Authorization header 6 523 G 524 Grammar 525 Authorization 6 526 Authorization-v 6 527 challenge 5 528 credentials 5 529 Proxy-Authenticate 7 530 Proxy-Authenticate-v 7 531 Proxy-Authorization 7 532 Proxy-Authorization-v 7 533 WWW-Authenticate 8 534 WWW-Authenticate-v 8 536 H 537 Headers 538 Authorization 6 539 Proxy-Authenticate 7 540 Proxy-Authorization 7 541 WWW-Authenticate 7 543 P 544 Proxy-Authenticate header 7 545 Proxy-Authorization header 7 547 S 548 Status Codes 549 401 Unauthorized 5 550 407 Proxy Authentication Required 5 552 W 553 WWW-Authenticate header 7 555 Authors' Addresses 557 Roy T. Fielding (editor) 558 Day Software 559 23 Corporate Plaza DR, Suite 280 560 Newport Beach, CA 92660 561 USA 563 Phone: +1-949-706-5300 564 Fax: +1-949-706-5305 565 Email: fielding@gbiv.com 566 URI: http://roy.gbiv.com/ 568 Jim Gettys 569 One Laptop per Child 570 21 Oak Knoll Road 571 Carlisle, MA 01741 572 USA 574 Email: jg@laptop.org 575 URI: http://www.laptop.org/ 577 Jeffrey C. Mogul 578 Hewlett-Packard Company 579 HP Labs, Large Scale Systems Group 580 1501 Page Mill Road, MS 1177 581 Palo Alto, CA 94304 582 USA 584 Email: JeffMogul@acm.org 585 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen 586 Microsoft Corporation 587 1 Microsoft Way 588 Redmond, WA 98052 589 USA 591 Email: henrikn@microsoft.com 593 Larry Masinter 594 Adobe Systems, Incorporated 595 345 Park Ave 596 San Jose, CA 95110 597 USA 599 Email: LMM@acm.org 600 URI: http://larry.masinter.net/ 602 Paul J. Leach 603 Microsoft Corporation 604 1 Microsoft Way 605 Redmond, WA 98052 607 Email: paulle@microsoft.com 609 Tim Berners-Lee 610 World Wide Web Consortium 611 MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory 612 The Stata Center, Building 32 613 32 Vassar Street 614 Cambridge, MA 02139 615 USA 617 Email: timbl@w3.org 618 URI: http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/ 619 Yves Lafon (editor) 620 World Wide Web Consortium 621 W3C / ERCIM 622 2004, rte des Lucioles 623 Sophia-Antipolis, AM 06902 624 France 626 Email: ylafon@w3.org 627 URI: http://www.raubacapeu.net/people/yves/ 629 Julian F. Reschke (editor) 630 greenbytes GmbH 631 Hafenweg 16 632 Muenster, NW 48155 633 Germany 635 Phone: +49 251 2807760 636 Fax: +49 251 2807761 637 Email: julian.reschke@greenbytes.de 638 URI: http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/