mirror of
https://github.com/etesync/android
synced 2024-11-29 11:28:19 +00:00
2f5622edaf
* Structural changes in the strings file (for translations)
788 lines
28 KiB
Plaintext
788 lines
28 KiB
Plaintext
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) C. Daboo
|
||
Request for Comments: 6764 Apple Inc.
|
||
Updates: 4791, 6352 February 2013
|
||
Category: Standards Track
|
||
ISSN: 2070-1721
|
||
|
||
|
||
Locating Services for Calendaring Extensions to
|
||
WebDAV (CalDAV) and vCard Extensions to WebDAV (CardDAV)
|
||
|
||
Abstract
|
||
|
||
This specification describes how DNS SRV records, DNS TXT records,
|
||
and well-known URIs can be used together or separately to locate
|
||
CalDAV (Calendaring Extensions to Web Distributed Authoring and
|
||
Versioning (WebDAV)) or CardDAV (vCard Extensions to WebDAV)
|
||
services.
|
||
|
||
Status of This Memo
|
||
|
||
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
|
||
|
||
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
|
||
(IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
|
||
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
|
||
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
|
||
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
|
||
|
||
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
|
||
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
|
||
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6764.
|
||
|
||
Copyright Notice
|
||
|
||
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
|
||
document authors. All rights reserved.
|
||
|
||
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
|
||
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
|
||
(http://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.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 1]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
Table of Contents
|
||
|
||
1. Introduction ....................................................2
|
||
2. Conventions Used in This Document ...............................3
|
||
3. CalDAV SRV Service Labels .......................................3
|
||
4. CalDAV and CardDAV Service TXT Records ..........................4
|
||
5. CalDAV and CardDAV Service Well-Known URI .......................4
|
||
5.1. Example: Well-Known URI Redirects to Actual
|
||
"Context Path" .............................................5
|
||
6. Client "Bootstrapping" Procedures ...............................5
|
||
7. Guidance for Service Providers ..................................8
|
||
8. Security Considerations .........................................9
|
||
9. IANA Considerations .............................................9
|
||
9.1. Well-Known URI Registrations ...............................9
|
||
9.1.1. caldav Well-Known URI Registration .................10
|
||
9.1.2. carddav Well-Known URI Registration ................10
|
||
9.2. Service Name Registrations ................................10
|
||
9.2.1. caldav Service Name Registration ...................10
|
||
9.2.2. caldavs Service Name Registration ..................11
|
||
9.2.3. carddav Service Name Registration ..................11
|
||
9.2.4. carddavs Service Name Registration .................12
|
||
10. Acknowledgments ...............................................12
|
||
11. References ....................................................12
|
||
11.1. Normative References .....................................12
|
||
11.2. Informative References ...................................14
|
||
|
||
1. Introduction
|
||
|
||
[RFC4791] defines the CalDAV calendar access protocol, based on HTTP
|
||
[RFC2616], for accessing calendar data stored on a server. CalDAV
|
||
clients need to be able to discover appropriate CalDAV servers within
|
||
their local area network and at other domains, e.g., to minimize the
|
||
need for end users to know specific details such as the fully
|
||
qualified domain name (FQDN) and port number for their servers.
|
||
|
||
[RFC6352] defines the CardDAV address book access protocol based on
|
||
HTTP [RFC2616], for accessing contact data stored on a server. As
|
||
with CalDAV, clients also need to be able to discover CardDAV
|
||
servers.
|
||
|
||
[RFC2782] defines a DNS-based service discovery protocol that has
|
||
been widely adopted as a means of locating particular services within
|
||
a local area network and beyond, using DNS SRV Resource Records
|
||
(RRs). This has been enhanced to provide additional service meta-
|
||
data by use of DNS TXT RRs as per [RFC6763].
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 2]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
This specification defines new SRV service types for the CalDAV
|
||
protocol and gives an example of how clients can use this together
|
||
with other protocol features to enable simple client configuration.
|
||
SRV service types for CardDAV are already defined in Section 11 of
|
||
[RFC6352].
|
||
|
||
Another issue with CalDAV or CardDAV service discovery is that the
|
||
service might not be located at the "root" URI of the HTTP server
|
||
hosting it. Thus, a client needs to be able to determine the
|
||
complete path component of the Request-URI to use in HTTP requests:
|
||
the "context path". For example, if CalDAV is implemented as a
|
||
"servlet" in a web server "container", the servlet "context path"
|
||
might be "/caldav/". So the URI for the CalDAV service would be,
|
||
e.g., "http://caldav.example.com/caldav/" rather than
|
||
"http://caldav.example.com/". SRV RRs by themselves only provide an
|
||
FQDN and port number for the service, not a path. Since the client
|
||
"bootstrapping" process requires initial access to the "context path"
|
||
of the service, there needs to be a simple way for clients to also
|
||
discover what that path is.
|
||
|
||
This specification makes use of the "well-known URI" feature
|
||
[RFC5785] of HTTP servers to provide a well-known URI for CalDAV or
|
||
CardDAV services that clients can use. The well-known URI will point
|
||
to a resource on the server that is simply a "stub" resource that
|
||
provides a redirect to the actual "context path" resource
|
||
representing the service endpoint.
|
||
|
||
2. Conventions Used in This Document
|
||
|
||
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
|
||
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
|
||
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
|
||
|
||
3. CalDAV SRV Service Labels
|
||
|
||
This specification adds two SRV service labels for use with CalDAV:
|
||
|
||
_caldav: Identifies a CalDAV server that uses HTTP without
|
||
Transport Layer Security (TLS) [RFC2818].
|
||
|
||
_caldavs: Identifies a CalDAV server that uses HTTP with TLS
|
||
[RFC2818].
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 3]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
Clients MUST honor Priority and Weight values in the SRV RRs, as
|
||
described by [RFC2782].
|
||
|
||
Example: service record for server without TLS
|
||
|
||
_caldav._tcp SRV 0 1 80 calendar.example.com.
|
||
|
||
Example: service record for server with TLS
|
||
|
||
_caldavs._tcp SRV 0 1 443 calendar.example.com.
|
||
|
||
4. CalDAV and CardDAV Service TXT Records
|
||
|
||
When SRV RRs are used to advertise CalDAV and CardDAV services, it is
|
||
also convenient to be able to specify a "context path" in the DNS to
|
||
be retrieved at the same time. To enable that, this specification
|
||
uses a TXT RR that follows the syntax defined in Section 6 of
|
||
[RFC6763] and defines a "path" key for use in that record. The value
|
||
of the key MUST be the actual "context path" to the corresponding
|
||
service on the server.
|
||
|
||
A site might provide TXT records in addition to SRV records for each
|
||
service. When present, clients MUST use the "path" value as the
|
||
"context path" for the service in HTTP requests. When not present,
|
||
clients use the ".well-known" URI approach described next.
|
||
|
||
Example: text record for service with TLS
|
||
|
||
_caldavs._tcp TXT path=/caldav
|
||
|
||
5. CalDAV and CardDAV Service Well-Known URI
|
||
|
||
Two ".well-known" URIs are registered by this specification for
|
||
CalDAV and CardDAV services, "caldav" and "carddav" respectively (see
|
||
Section 9). These URIs point to a resource that the client can use
|
||
as the initial "context path" for the service they are trying to
|
||
connect to. The server MUST redirect HTTP requests for that resource
|
||
to the actual "context path" using one of the available mechanisms
|
||
provided by HTTP (e.g., using a 301, 303, or 307 response). Clients
|
||
MUST handle HTTP redirects on the ".well-known" URI. Servers MUST
|
||
NOT locate the actual CalDAV or CardDAV service endpoint at the
|
||
".well-known" URI as per Section 1.1 of [RFC5785].
|
||
|
||
Servers SHOULD set an appropriate Cache-Control header value (as per
|
||
Section 14.9 of [RFC2616]) in the redirect response to ensure caching
|
||
occurs or does not occur as needed or as required by the type of
|
||
response generated. For example, if it is anticipated that the
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 4]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
location of the redirect might change over time, then a "no-cache"
|
||
value would be used.
|
||
|
||
To facilitate "context paths" that might differ from user to user,
|
||
the server MAY require authentication when a client tries to access
|
||
the ".well-known" URI (i.e., the server would return a 401 status
|
||
response to the unauthenticated request from the client, then return
|
||
the redirect response only after a successful authentication by the
|
||
client).
|
||
|
||
5.1. Example: Well-Known URI Redirects to Actual "Context Path"
|
||
|
||
A CalDAV server has a "context path" that is "/servlet/caldav". The
|
||
client will use "/.well-known/caldav" as the path for its
|
||
"bootstrapping" process after it has first found the FQDN and port
|
||
number via an SRV lookup or via manual entry of information by the
|
||
user, from which the client can parse suitable information. When the
|
||
client makes an HTTP request against "/.well-known/caldav", the
|
||
server would issue an HTTP redirect response with a Location response
|
||
header using the path "/servlet/caldav". The client would then
|
||
"follow" this redirect to the new resource and continue making HTTP
|
||
requests there to complete its "bootstrapping" process.
|
||
|
||
6. Client "Bootstrapping" Procedures
|
||
|
||
This section describes a procedure that CalDAV or CardDAV clients
|
||
SHOULD use to do their initial configuration based on minimal user
|
||
input. The goal is to determine an http: or https: URI that
|
||
describes the full path to the user's principal-URL [RFC3744].
|
||
|
||
1. Processing user input:
|
||
|
||
* For a CalDAV server:
|
||
|
||
+ Minimal input from a user would consist of a calendar user
|
||
address and a password. A calendar user address is defined
|
||
by iCalendar [RFC5545] to be a URI [RFC3986]. Provided a
|
||
user identifier and a domain name can be extracted from the
|
||
URI, this simple "bootstrapping" configuration can be done.
|
||
|
||
+ If the calendar user address is a "mailto:" [RFC6068] URI,
|
||
the "mailbox" portion of the URI is examined, and the
|
||
"local-part" and "domain" portions are extracted.
|
||
|
||
+ If the calendar user address is an "http:" [RFC2616] or
|
||
"https:" [RFC2818] URI, the "userinfo" and "host" portion
|
||
of the URI [RFC3986] is extracted.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 5]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
* For a CardDAV server:
|
||
|
||
+ Minimal input from a user would consist of their email
|
||
address [RFC5322] for the domain where the CardDAV service
|
||
is hosted, and a password. The "mailbox" portion of the
|
||
email address is examined, and the "local-part" and
|
||
"domain" portions are extracted.
|
||
|
||
2. Determination of service FQDN and port number:
|
||
|
||
* An SRV lookup for _caldavs._tcp (for CalDAV) or _carddavs._tcp
|
||
(for CardDAV) is done with the extracted "domain" as the
|
||
service domain.
|
||
|
||
* If no result is found, the client can try _caldav._tcp (for
|
||
CalDAV) or _carddav._tcp (for CardDAV) provided non-TLS
|
||
connections are appropriate.
|
||
|
||
* If an SRV record is returned, the client extracts the target
|
||
FQDN and port number. If multiple SRV records are returned,
|
||
the client MUST use the Priority and Weight fields in the
|
||
record to determine which one to pick (as per [RFC2782]).
|
||
|
||
* If an SRV record is not found, the client will need to prompt
|
||
the user to enter the FQDN and port number information
|
||
directly or use some other heuristic, for example, using the
|
||
extracted "domain" as the FQDN and default HTTPS or HTTP port
|
||
numbers. In this situation, clients MUST first attempt an
|
||
HTTP connection with TLS.
|
||
|
||
3. Determination of initial "context path":
|
||
|
||
* When an SRV lookup is done and a valid SRV record returned,
|
||
the client MUST also query for a corresponding TXT record and
|
||
check for the presence of a "path" key in its response. If
|
||
present, the value of the "path" key is used for the initial
|
||
"context path".
|
||
|
||
* When an initial "context path" has not been determined from a
|
||
TXT record, the initial "context path" is taken to be
|
||
"/.well-known/caldav" (for CalDAV) or "/.well-known/carddav"
|
||
(for CardDAV).
|
||
|
||
* If the initial "context path" derived from a TXT record
|
||
generates HTTP errors when targeted by requests, the client
|
||
SHOULD repeat its "bootstrapping" procedure using the
|
||
appropriate ".well-known" URI instead.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 6]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
4. Determination of user identifier:
|
||
|
||
* The client will need to make authenticated HTTP requests to
|
||
the service. Typically, a "user identifier" is required for
|
||
some form of user/password authentication. When a user
|
||
identifier is required, clients MUST first use the "mailbox"
|
||
portion of the calendar user address provided by the user in
|
||
the case of a "mailto:" address and, if that results in an
|
||
authentication failure, SHOULD fall back to using the "local-
|
||
part" extracted from the "mailto:" address. For an "http:" or
|
||
"https:" calendar user address, the "userinfo" portion is used
|
||
as the user identifier for authentication. This is in line
|
||
with the guidance outlined in Section 7. If these user
|
||
identifiers result in authentication failure, the client
|
||
SHOULD prompt the user for a valid identifier.
|
||
|
||
5. Connecting to the service:
|
||
|
||
* Subsequent to configuration, the client will make HTTP
|
||
requests to the service. When using "_caldavs" or "_carddavs"
|
||
services, a TLS negotiation is done immediately upon
|
||
connection. The client MUST do certificate verification using
|
||
the procedure outlined in Section 6 of [RFC6125] in regard to
|
||
verification with an SRV RR as the starting point.
|
||
|
||
* The client does a "PROPFIND" [RFC4918] request with the
|
||
request URI set to the initial "context path". The body of
|
||
the request SHOULD include the DAV:current-user-principal
|
||
[RFC5397] property as one of the properties to return. Note
|
||
that clients MUST properly handle HTTP redirect responses for
|
||
the request. The server will use the HTTP authentication
|
||
procedure outlined in [RFC2617] or use some other appropriate
|
||
authentication schemes to authenticate the user.
|
||
|
||
* If the server returns a 404 ("Not Found") HTTP status response
|
||
to the request on the initial "context path", clients MAY try
|
||
repeating the request on the "root" URI "/" or prompt the user
|
||
for a suitable path.
|
||
|
||
* If the DAV:current-user-principal property is returned on the
|
||
request, the client uses that value for the principal-URL of
|
||
the authenticated user. With that, it can execute a
|
||
"PROPFIND" request on the principal-URL and discover
|
||
additional properties for configuration (e.g., calendar or
|
||
address book "home" collections).
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 7]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
* If the DAV:current-user-principal property is not returned,
|
||
then the client will need to request the principal-URL path
|
||
from the user in order to continue with configuration.
|
||
|
||
Once a successful account discovery step has been done, clients
|
||
SHOULD cache the service details that were successfully used (user
|
||
identity, principal-URL with full scheme/host/port details) and reuse
|
||
those when connecting again at a later time.
|
||
|
||
If a subsequent connection attempt fails, or authentication fails
|
||
persistently, clients SHOULD retry the SRV lookup and account
|
||
discovery to "refresh" the cached data.
|
||
|
||
7. Guidance for Service Providers
|
||
|
||
Service providers wanting to offer CalDAV or CardDAV services that
|
||
can be configured by clients using SRV records need to follow certain
|
||
procedures to ensure proper operation.
|
||
|
||
o CalDAV or CardDAV servers SHOULD be configured to allow
|
||
authentication with calendar user addresses (just taking the
|
||
"mailbox" portion of any "mailto:" URI) or email addresses
|
||
respectively, or with "user identifiers" extracted from them. In
|
||
the former case, the addresses MUST NOT conflict with other forms
|
||
of a permitted user login name. In the latter case, the extracted
|
||
"user identifiers" need to be unique across the server and MUST
|
||
NOT conflict with any login name on the server.
|
||
|
||
o Servers MUST force authentication for "PROPFIND" requests that
|
||
retrieve the DAV:current-user-principal property to ensure that
|
||
the value of the DAV:current-user-principal property returned
|
||
corresponds to the principal-URL of the user making the request.
|
||
|
||
o If the service provider uses TLS, the service provider MUST ensure
|
||
a certificate is installed that can be verified by clients using
|
||
the procedure outlined in Section 6 of [RFC6125] in regard to
|
||
verification with an SRV RR as the starting point. In particular,
|
||
certificates SHOULD include SRV-ID and DNS-ID identifiers as
|
||
appropriate, as described in Section 8.
|
||
|
||
o Service providers should install the appropriate SRV records for
|
||
the offered services and optionally include TXT records.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 8]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
8. Security Considerations
|
||
|
||
Clients that support TLS as defined by [RFC2818] SHOULD try the
|
||
"_caldavs" or "_carddavs" services first before trying the "_caldav"
|
||
or "_carddav" services respectively. If a user has explicitly
|
||
requested a connection with TLS, the client MUST NOT use any service
|
||
information returned for the "_caldav" or "_carddav" services.
|
||
Clients MUST follow the certificate-verification process specified in
|
||
[RFC6125].
|
||
|
||
A malicious attacker with access to the DNS server data, or that is
|
||
able to get spoofed answers cached in a recursive resolver, can
|
||
potentially cause clients to connect to any server chosen by the
|
||
attacker. In the absence of a secure DNS option, clients SHOULD
|
||
check that the target FQDN returned in the SRV record matches the
|
||
original service domain that was queried. If the target FQDN is not
|
||
in the queried domain, clients SHOULD verify with the user that the
|
||
SRV target FQDN is suitable for use before executing any connections
|
||
to the host. Alternatively, if TLS is being used for the service,
|
||
clients MUST use the procedure outlined in Section 6 of [RFC6125] to
|
||
verify the service. When the target FQDN does not match the original
|
||
service domain that was queried, clients MUST check the SRV-ID
|
||
identifier in the server's certificate. If the FQDN does match,
|
||
clients MUST check any SRV-ID identifiers in the server's certificate
|
||
or, if no SRV-ID identifiers are present, MUST check the DNS-ID
|
||
identifiers in the server's certificate.
|
||
|
||
Implementations of TLS [RFC5246], used as the basis for TLS
|
||
([RFC2818]), typically support multiple versions of the protocol as
|
||
well as the older SSL (Secure Sockets Layer) protocol. Because of
|
||
known security vulnerabilities, clients and servers MUST NOT request,
|
||
offer, or use SSL 2.0. See Appendix E.2 of [RFC5246] for further
|
||
details.
|
||
|
||
9. IANA Considerations
|
||
|
||
9.1. Well-Known URI Registrations
|
||
|
||
This document defines two ".well-known" URIs using the registration
|
||
procedure and template from Section 5.1 of [RFC5785].
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 9]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
9.1.1. caldav Well-Known URI Registration
|
||
|
||
URI suffix: caldav
|
||
|
||
Change controller: IETF
|
||
|
||
Specification document(s): This RFC
|
||
|
||
Related information: See also [RFC4791].
|
||
|
||
9.1.2. carddav Well-Known URI Registration
|
||
|
||
URI suffix: carddav
|
||
|
||
Change controller: IETF
|
||
|
||
Specification document(s): This RFC
|
||
|
||
Related information: See also [RFC6352].
|
||
|
||
9.2. Service Name Registrations
|
||
|
||
This document registers four new service names as per [RFC6335]. Two
|
||
are defined in this document, and two are defined in [RFC6352],
|
||
Section 11.
|
||
|
||
9.2.1. caldav Service Name Registration
|
||
|
||
Service Name: caldav
|
||
|
||
Transport Protocol(s): TCP
|
||
|
||
Assignee: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
|
||
|
||
Contact: IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org>
|
||
|
||
Description: Calendaring Extensions to WebDAV (CalDAV) - non-TLS
|
||
|
||
Reference: [RFC6764]
|
||
|
||
Assignment Note: This is an extension of the http service. Defined
|
||
TXT keys: path=<context path>
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 10]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
9.2.2. caldavs Service Name Registration
|
||
|
||
Service Name: caldavs
|
||
|
||
Transport Protocol(s): TCP
|
||
|
||
Assignee: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
|
||
|
||
Contact: IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org>
|
||
|
||
Description: Calendaring Extensions to WebDAV (CalDAV) - over TLS
|
||
|
||
Reference: [RFC6764]
|
||
|
||
Assignment Note: This is an extension of the https service. Defined
|
||
TXT keys: path=<context path>
|
||
|
||
9.2.3. carddav Service Name Registration
|
||
|
||
Service Name: carddav
|
||
|
||
Transport Protocol(s): TCP
|
||
|
||
Assignee: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
|
||
|
||
Contact: IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org>
|
||
|
||
Description: vCard Extensions to WebDAV (CardDAV) - non-TLS
|
||
|
||
Reference: [RFC6352]
|
||
|
||
Assignment Note: This is an extension of the http service. Defined
|
||
TXT keys: path=<context path>
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 11]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
9.2.4. carddavs Service Name Registration
|
||
|
||
Service Name: carddavs
|
||
|
||
Transport Protocol(s): TCP
|
||
|
||
Assignee: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
|
||
|
||
Contact: IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org>
|
||
|
||
Description: vCard Extensions to WebDAV (CardDAV) - over TLS
|
||
|
||
Reference: [RFC6352]
|
||
|
||
Assignment Note: This is an extension of the https service. Defined
|
||
TXT keys: path=<context path>
|
||
|
||
10. Acknowledgments
|
||
|
||
This specification was suggested by discussion that took place within
|
||
the Calendaring and Scheduling Consortium's CalDAV Technical
|
||
Committee. The author thanks the following for their contributions:
|
||
Stuart Cheshire, Bernard Desruisseaux, Eran Hammer-Lahav, Helge Hess,
|
||
Arnaud Quillaud, Wilfredo Sanchez, and Joe Touch.
|
||
|
||
11. References
|
||
|
||
11.1. Normative References
|
||
|
||
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
|
||
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
|
||
|
||
[RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H.,
|
||
Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext
|
||
Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.
|
||
|
||
[RFC2617] Franks, J., Hallam-Baker, P., Hostetler, J., Lawrence, S.,
|
||
Leach, P., Luotonen, A., and L. Stewart, "HTTP
|
||
Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication",
|
||
RFC 2617, June 1999.
|
||
|
||
[RFC2782] Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for
|
||
specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782,
|
||
February 2000.
|
||
|
||
[RFC2818] Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818, May 2000.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 12]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
[RFC3744] Clemm, G., Reschke, J., Sedlar, E., and J. Whitehead, "Web
|
||
Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV)
|
||
Access Control Protocol", RFC 3744, May 2004.
|
||
|
||
[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
|
||
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
|
||
RFC 3986, January 2005.
|
||
|
||
[RFC4791] Daboo, C., Desruisseaux, B., and L. Dusseault,
|
||
"Calendaring Extensions to WebDAV (CalDAV)", RFC 4791,
|
||
March 2007.
|
||
|
||
[RFC4918] Dusseault, L., "HTTP Extensions for Web Distributed
|
||
Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV)", RFC 4918, June 2007.
|
||
|
||
[RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
|
||
(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, August 2008.
|
||
|
||
[RFC5322] Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322,
|
||
October 2008.
|
||
|
||
[RFC5397] Sanchez, W. and C. Daboo, "WebDAV Current Principal
|
||
Extension", RFC 5397, December 2008.
|
||
|
||
[RFC5785] Nottingham, M. and E. Hammer-Lahav, "Defining Well-Known
|
||
Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)", RFC 5785,
|
||
April 2010.
|
||
|
||
[RFC6068] Duerst, M., Masinter, L., and J. Zawinski, "The 'mailto'
|
||
URI Scheme", RFC 6068, October 2010.
|
||
|
||
[RFC6125] Saint-Andre, P. and J. Hodges, "Representation and
|
||
Verification of Domain-Based Application Service Identity
|
||
within Internet Public Key Infrastructure Using X.509
|
||
(PKIX) Certificates in the Context of Transport Layer
|
||
Security (TLS)", RFC 6125, March 2011.
|
||
|
||
[RFC6335] Cotton, M., Eggert, L., Touch, J., Westerlund, M., and S.
|
||
Cheshire, "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
|
||
Procedures for the Management of the Service Name and
|
||
Transport Protocol Port Number Registry", BCP 165,
|
||
RFC 6335, August 2011.
|
||
|
||
[RFC6352] Daboo, C., "CardDAV: vCard Extensions to Web Distributed
|
||
Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV)", RFC 6352, August 2011.
|
||
|
||
[RFC6763] Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "DNS-Based Service
|
||
Discovery", RFC 6763, February 2013.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 13]
|
||
|
||
RFC 6764 SRV for CalDAV & CardDAV February 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
11.2. Informative References
|
||
|
||
[RFC5545] Desruisseaux, B., "Internet Calendaring and Scheduling
|
||
Core Object Specification (iCalendar)", RFC 5545,
|
||
September 2009.
|
||
|
||
Author's Address
|
||
|
||
Cyrus Daboo
|
||
Apple Inc.
|
||
1 Infinite Loop
|
||
Cupertino, CA 95014
|
||
USA
|
||
|
||
EMail: cyrus@daboo.name
|
||
URI: http://www.apple.com/
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Daboo Standards Track [Page 14]
|
||
|