Imported Upstream version 2.46.0upstream/2.46.0

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 563 deletions

diff --git a/docs/specs/rfc2324.txt b/docs/specs/rfc2324.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index a85921a9..00000000
--- a/docs/specs/rfc2324.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,563 +0,0 @@
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Network Working Group                                       L. Masinter
-Request for Comments: 2324                                 1 April 1998
-Category: Informational
-
-
-          Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol (HTCPCP/1.0)
-
-Status of this Memo
-
-   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
-   not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
-   memo is unlimited.
-
-Copyright Notice
-
-   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998).  All Rights Reserved.
-
-Abstract
-
-   This document describes HTCPCP, a protocol for controlling,
-   monitoring, and diagnosing coffee pots.
-
-1. Rationale and Scope
-
-   There is coffee all over the world. Increasingly, in a world in which
-   computing is ubiquitous, the computists want to make coffee. Coffee
-   brewing is an art, but the distributed intelligence of the web-
-   connected world transcends art.  Thus, there is a strong, dark, rich
-   requirement for a protocol designed espressoly for the brewing of
-   coffee. Coffee is brewed using coffee pots.  Networked coffee pots
-   require a control protocol if they are to be controlled.
-
-   Increasingly, home and consumer devices are being connected to the
-   Internet. Early networking experiments demonstrated vending devices
-   connected to the Internet for status monitoring [COKE]. One of the
-   first remotely _operated_ machine to be hooked up to the Internet,
-   the Internet Toaster, (controlled via SNMP) was debuted in 1990
-   [RFC2235].
-
-   The demand for ubiquitous appliance connectivity that is causing the
-   consumption of the IPv4 address space. Consumers want remote control
-   of devices such as coffee pots so that they may wake up to freshly
-   brewed coffee, or cause coffee to be prepared at a precise time after
-   the completion of dinner preparations.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Masinter                     Informational                      [Page 1]
-
-RFC 2324                       HTCPCP/1.0                   1 April 1998
-
-
-   This document specifies a Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol
-   (HTCPCP), which permits the full request and responses necessary to
-   control all devices capable of making the popular caffeinated hot
-   beverages.
-
-   HTTP 1.1 ([RFC2068]) permits the transfer of web objects from origin
-   servers to clients. The web is world-wide.  HTCPCP is based on HTTP.
-   This is because HTTP is everywhere. It could not be so pervasive
-   without being good. Therefore, HTTP is good. If you want good coffee,
-   HTCPCP needs to be good. To make HTCPCP good, it is good to base
-   HTCPCP on HTTP.
-
-   Future versions of this protocol may include extensions for espresso
-   machines and similar devices.
-
-2. HTCPCP Protocol
-
-   The HTCPCP protocol is built on top of HTTP, with the addition of a
-   few new methods, header fields and return codes.  All HTCPCP servers
-   should be referred to with the "coffee:" URI scheme (Section 4).
-
-2.1 HTCPCP Added Methods
-
-2.1.1 The BREW method, and the use of POST
-
-   Commands to control a coffee pot are sent from client to coffee
-   server using either the BREW or POST method, and a message body with
-   Content-Type set to "application/coffee-pot-command".
-
-   A coffee pot server MUST accept both the BREW and POST method
-   equivalently.  However, the use of POST for causing actions to happen
-   is deprecated.
-
-   Coffee pots heat water using electronic mechanisms, so there is no
-   fire. Thus, no firewalls are necessary, and firewall control policy
-   is irrelevant. However, POST may be a trademark for coffee, and so
-   the BREW method has been added. The BREW method may be used with
-   other HTTP-based protocols (e.g., the Hyper Text Brewery Control
-   Protocol).
-
-2.1.2 GET method
-
-   In HTTP, the GET method is used to mean "retrieve whatever
-   information (in the form of an entity) identified by the Request-
-   URI." If the Request-URI refers to a data-producing process, it is
-   the produced data which shall be returned as the entity in the
-   response and not the source text of the process, unless that text
-   happens to be the output of the process.
-
-
-
-Masinter                     Informational                      [Page 2]
-
-RFC 2324                       HTCPCP/1.0                   1 April 1998
-
-
-   In HTCPCP, the resources associated with a coffee pot are physical,
-   and not information resources. The "data" for most coffee URIs
-   contain no caffeine.
-
-2.1.3 PROPFIND method
-
-   If a cup of coffee is data, metadata about the brewed resource is
-   discovered using the PROPFIND method [WEBDAV].
-
-2.1.4 WHEN method
-
-   When coffee is poured, and milk is offered, it is necessary for the
-   holder of the recipient of milk to say "when" at the time when
-   sufficient milk has been introduced into the coffee. For this
-   purpose, the "WHEN" method has been added to HTCPCP. Enough? Say
-   WHEN.
-
-2.2 Coffee Pot Header fields
-
-   HTCPCP recommends several HTTP header fields and defines some new
-   ones.
-
-2.2.1 Recommended header fields
-
-2.2.1.1 The "safe" response header field.
-
-   [SAFE] defines a HTTP response header field, "Safe", which can be
-   used to indicate that repeating a HTTP request is safe. The inclusion
-   of a "Safe: Yes" header field allows a client to repeat a previous
-   request if the result of the request might be repeated.
-
-   The actual safety of devices for brewing coffee varies widely, and
-   may depend, in fact, on conditions in the client rather than just in
-   the server. Thus, this protocol includes an extension to the "Safe"
-   response header:
-
-          Safe                = "Safe" ":" safe-nature
-          safe-nature         = "yes" | "no" | conditionally-safe
-          conditionally-safe  = "if-" safe-condition
-          safe-condition      = "user-awake" | token
-
-   indication will allow user agents to handle retries of some safe
-   requests, in particular safe POST requests, in a more user-friendly
-   way.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Masinter                     Informational                      [Page 3]
-
-RFC 2324                       HTCPCP/1.0                   1 April 1998
-
-
-2.2.2 New header fields
-
-2.2.2.1 The Accept-Additions header field
-
-   In HTTP, the "Accept" request-header field is used to specify media
-   types which are acceptable for the response. However, in HTCPCP, the
-   response may result in additional actions on the part of the
-   automated pot. For this reason, HTCPCP adds a new header field,
-   "Accept-Additions":
-
-
-       Accept-Additions = "Accept-Additions" ":"
-                          #( addition-range [ accept-params ] )
-
-        addition-type   = ( "*"
-                          | milk-type
-                          | syrup-type
-                          | sweetener-type
-                          | spice-type
-                          | alcohol-type
-                          ) *( ";" parameter )
-        milk-type       = ( "Cream" | "Half-and-half" | "Whole-milk"
-                          | "Part-Skim" | "Skim" | "Non-Dairy" )
-        syrup-type      = ( "Vanilla" | "Almond" | "Raspberry"
-                          | "Chocolate" )
-        alcohol-type    = ( "Whisky" | "Rum" | "Kahlua" | "Aquavit" )
-
-2.2.3 Omitted Header Fields
-
-   No options were given for decaffeinated coffee. What's the point?
-
-2.3 HTCPCP return codes
-
-   Normal HTTP return codes are used to indicate difficulties of the
-   HTCPCP server. This section identifies special interpretations and
-   new return codes.
-
-2.3.1 406 Not Acceptable
-
-   This return code is normally interpreted as "The resource identified
-   by the request is only capable of generating response entities which
-   have content characteristics not acceptable according to the accept
-   headers sent in the request. In HTCPCP, this response code MAY be
-   returned if the operator of the coffee pot cannot comply with the
-   Accept-Addition request. Unless the request was a HEAD request, the
-   response SHOULD include an entity containing a list of available
-   coffee additions.
-
-
-
-
-Masinter                     Informational                      [Page 4]
-
-RFC 2324                       HTCPCP/1.0                   1 April 1998
-
-
-   In practice, most automated coffee pots cannot currently provide
-   additions.
-
-2.3.2 418 I'm a teapot
-
-   Any attempt to brew coffee with a teapot should result in the error
-   code "418 I'm a teapot". The resulting entity body MAY be short and
-   stout.
-
-3. The "coffee" URI scheme
-
-   Because coffee is international, there are international coffee URI
-   schemes.  All coffee URL schemes are written with URL encoding of the
-   UTF-8 encoding of the characters that spell the word for "coffee" in
-   any of 29 languages, following the conventions for
-   internationalization in URIs [URLI18N].
-
-coffee-url  =  coffee-scheme ":" [ "//" host ]
-                ["/" pot-designator ] ["?" additions-list ]
-
-coffee-scheme = ( "koffie"                      ; Afrikaans, Dutch
-                  | "q%C3%A6hv%C3%A6"          ; Azerbaijani
-                  | "%D9%82%D9%87%D9%88%D8%A9" ; Arabic
-               | "akeita"                   ; Basque
-               | "koffee"                   ; Bengali
-               | "kahva"                    ; Bosnian
-               | "kafe"                     ; Bulgarian, Czech
-               | "caf%C3%E8"                ; Catalan, French, Galician
-                  | "%E5%92%96%E5%95%A1"       ; Chinese
-                  | "kava"                     ; Croatian
-               | "k%C3%A1va                 ; Czech
-               | "kaffe"                    ; Danish, Norwegian, Swedish
-               | "coffee"                   ; English
-               | "kafo"                     ; Esperanto
-                  | "kohv"                     ; Estonian
-               | "kahvi"                    ; Finnish
-               | "%4Baffee"                 ; German
-               | "%CE%BA%CE%B1%CF%86%CE%AD" ; Greek
-               | "%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%8C%E0%A4%AB%E0%A5%80" ; Hindi
-               | "%E3%82%B3%E3%83%BC%E3%83%92%E3%83%BC" ; Japanese
-               | "%EC%BB%A4%ED%94%BC"       ; Korean
-               | "%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%84%D0%B5" ; Russian
-               | "%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%B2%E0%B9%81%E0%B8%9F" ; Thai
-               )
-
-   pot-designator = "pot-" integer  ; for machines with multiple pots
-   additions-list = #( addition )
-
-
-
-
-Masinter                     Informational                      [Page 5]
-
-RFC 2324                       HTCPCP/1.0                   1 April 1998
-
-
-   All alternative coffee-scheme forms are equivalent.  However, the use
-   of coffee-scheme in various languages MAY be interpreted as an
-   indication of the kind of coffee produced by the coffee pot.  Note
-   that while URL scheme names are case-independent, capitalization is
-   important for German and thus the initial "K" must be encoded.
-
-4. The "message/coffeepot" media type
-
-   The entity body of a POST or BREW request MUST be of Content-Type
-   "message/coffeepot". Since most of the information for controlling
-   the coffee pot is conveyed by the additional headers, the content of
-   "message/coffeepot" contains only a coffee-message-body:
-
-   coffee-message-body = "start" | "stop"
-
-5. Operational constraints
-
-   This section lays out some of the operational issues with deployment
-   of HTCPCP ubiquitously.
-
-5.1 Timing Considerations
-
-   A robust quality of service is required between the coffee pot user
-   and the coffee pot service.  Coffee pots SHOULD use the Network Time
-   Protocol [NTP] to synchronize their clocks to a globally accurate
-   time standard.
-
-   Telerobotics has been an expensive technology. However, with the
-   advent of the Cambridge Coffee Pot [CAM], the use of the web (rather
-   than SNMP) for remote system monitoring and management has been
-   proven.  Additional coffee pot maintenance tasks might be
-   accomplished by remote robotics.
-
-   Web data is normally static. Therefore to save data transmission and
-   time, Web browser programs store each Web page retrieved by a user on
-   the user's computer. Thus, if the user wants to return to that page,
-   it is now stored locally and does not need to be requested again from
-   the server. An image used for robot control or for monitoring a
-   changing scene is dynamic. A fresh version needs to be retrieved from
-   the server each time it is accessed.
-
-5.2 Crossing firewalls
-
-   In most organizations HTTP traffic crosses firewalls fairly easily.
-   Modern coffee pots do not use fire. However, a "firewall" is useful
-   for protection of any source from any manner of heat, and not just
-   fire. Every home computer network SHOULD be protected by a firewall
-   from sources of heat. However, remote control of coffee pots is
-
-
-
-Masinter                     Informational                      [Page 6]
-
-RFC 2324                       HTCPCP/1.0                   1 April 1998
-
-
-   important from outside the home. Thus, it is important that HTCPCP
-   cross firewalls easily.
-
-   By basing HTCPCP on HTTP and using port 80, it will get all of HTTP's
-   firewall-crossing virtues. Of course, the home firewalls will require
-   reconfiguration or new versions in order to accommodate HTCPCP-
-   specific methods, headers and trailers, but such upgrades will be
-   easily accommodated. Most home network system administrators drink
-   coffee, and are willing to accommodate the needs of tunnelling
-   HTCPCP.
-
-6. System management considerations
-
-   Coffee pot monitoring using HTTP protocols has been an early
-   application of the web.  In the earliest instance, coffee pot
-   monitoring was an early (and appropriate) use of ATM networks [CAM].
-
-   The traditional technique [CAM] was to attach a frame-grabber to a
-   video camera, and feed the images to a web server. This was an
-   appropriate application of ATM networks. In this coffee pot
-   installation, the Trojan Room of Cambridge University laboratories
-   was used to give a web interface to monitor a common coffee pot.  of
-   us involved in related research and, being poor, impoverished
-   academics, we only had one coffee filter machine between us, which
-   lived in the corridor just outside the Trojan Room. However, being
-   highly dedicated and hard-working academics, we got through a lot of
-   coffee, and when a fresh pot was brewed, it often didn't last long.
-
-   This service was created as the first application to use a new RPC
-   mechanism designed in the Cambridge Computer Laboratory - MSRPC2. It
-   runs over MSNL (Multi-Service Network Layer) - a network layer
-   protocol designed for ATM networks.
-
-   Coffee pots on the Internet may be managed using the Coffee Pot MIB
-   [CPMIB].
-
-7. Security Considerations
-
-   Anyone who gets in between me and my morning coffee should be
-   insecure.
-
-   Unmoderated access to unprotected coffee pots from Internet users
-   might lead to several kinds of "denial of coffee service" attacks.
-   The improper use of filtration devices might admit trojan grounds.
-   Filtration is not a good virus protection method.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Masinter                     Informational                      [Page 7]
-
-RFC 2324                       HTCPCP/1.0                   1 April 1998
-
-
-   Putting coffee grounds into Internet plumbing may result in clogged
-   plumbing, which would entail the services of an Internet Plumber
-   [PLUMB], who would, in turn, require an Internet Plumber's Helper.
-
-   Access authentication will be discussed in a separate memo.
-
-8. Acknowledgements
-
-   Many thanks to the many contributors to this standard, including Roy
-   Fielding, Mark Day, Keith Moore, Carl Uno-Manros, Michael Slavitch,
-   and Martin Duerst.  The inspiration of the Prancing Pony, the CMU
-   Coke Machine, the Cambridge Coffee Pot, the Internet Toaster, and
-   other computer controlled remote devices have led to this valuable
-   creation.
-
-9. References
-
-   [RFC2068] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., and T.
-   Berners-Lee, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2068,
-   January 1997.
-
-   [RFC2186] Wessels, D., and K. Claffy, "Internet Cache Protocol (ICP),
-   version 2," RFC 2186, September 1997
-
-   [CPMIB] Slavitch, M., "Definitions of Managed Objects for Drip-Type
-   Heated Beverage Hardware Devices using SMIv2", RFC 2325, 1 April
-   1998.
-
-   [HTSVMP] Q. Stafford-Fraser, "Hyper Text Sandwich Van Monitoring
-   Protocol, Version 3.2". In preparation.
-
-   [RFC2295] Holtman, K., and A. Mutz, "Transparent Content Negotiation
-   in HTTP", RFC 2295, March 1998.
-
-   [SAFE] K. Holtman. "The Safe Response Header Field", September 1997.
-
-   [CAM] "The Trojan Room Coffee Machine", D. Gordon and M. Johnson,
-   University of Cambridge Computer Lab,
-   <http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/coffee/coffee.html>
-
-   [CBIO] "The Trojan Room Coffee Pot, a (non-technical) biography", Q.
-   Stafford-Fraser, University of Cambridge Computer Lab,
-   <http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/coffee/qsf/coffee.html>.
-
-   [RFC2235] Zakon, R., "Hobbes' Internet Timeline", FYI 32, RFC 2230,
-   November 1997.  See also
-   <http://www.internode.com.au/images/toaster2.jpg>
-
-
-
-
-Masinter                     Informational                      [Page 8]
-
-RFC 2324                       HTCPCP/1.0                   1 April 1998
-
-
-   [NTP] Mills, D., "Network Time Protocol (Version 3) Specification,
-   Implementation and Analysis", RFC 1305, March 1992.
-
-   [URLI18N] Masinter, L., "Using UTF8 for non-ASCII Characters in
-   Extended URIs" Work in Progress.
-
-   [PLUMB] B. Metcalfe, "Internet Plumber of the Year: Jim Gettys",
-   Infoworld, February 2, 1998.
-
-   [COKE] D. Nichols, "Coke machine history", C. Everhart, "Interesting
-   uses of networking", <http://www-
-   cse.ucsd.edu/users/bsy/coke.history.txt>.
-
-10. Author's Address
-
-   Larry Masinter
-   Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
-   3333 Coyote Hill Road
-   Palo Alto, CA 94304
-
-   EMail: masinter@parc.xerox.com
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Masinter                     Informational                      [Page 9]
-
-RFC 2324                       HTCPCP/1.0                   1 April 1998
-
-
-11.  Full Copyright Statement
-
-   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998).  All Rights Reserved.
-
-   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
-   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
-   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
-   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
-   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
-   included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
-   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
-   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
-   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
-   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
-   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
-   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
-   English.
-
-   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
-   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
-
-   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
-   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
-   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
-   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
-   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
-   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Masinter                     Informational                     [Page 10]
-