{"draft":"draft-ietf-urn-http-conv-01","doc_id":"RFC2169","title":"A Trivial Convention for using HTTP in URN Resolution ","authors":["R. Daniel"],"format":["ASCII","HTML"],"page_count":"9","pub_status":"EXPERIMENTAL","status":"HISTORIC","source":"Uniform Resource Names","abstract":"The Uniform Resource Names Working Group (URN-WG) was formed to\r\nspecify persistent, location-independent names for network accessible\r\nresources, as well as resolution mechanisms to retrieve the resources\r\ngiven such a name. At this time the URN-WG is considering one\r\nparticular resolution mechanism, the NAPTR proposal [1]. That\r\nproposal specifies how a client may find a \"resolver\" for a URN. A\r\nresolver is a database that can provide information about the\r\nresource identified by a URN, such as the resource's location, a\r\nbibliographic description, or even the resource itself. The protocol\r\nused for the client to communicate with the resolver is not specified\r\nin the NAPTR proposal.  Instead, the NAPTR resource record provides a\r\nfield that indicates the \"resolution protocol\" and \"resolution\r\nservice requests\" offered by the resolver.\r\n\r\nThis document specifies the \"THTTP\" resolution protocol - a trivial\r\nconvention for encoding resolution service requests and responses as\r\nHTTP 1.0 or 1.1 requests and responses.  The primary goal of THTTP is\r\nto be simple to implement so that existing HTTP servers may easily\r\nadd support for URN resolution. We expect that the databases used by\r\nearly resolvers will be useful when more sophisticated resolution\r\nprotocols are developed later.","pub_date":"May 1997","keywords":[],"obsoletes":[],"obsoleted_by":[],"updates":[],"updated_by":[],"see_also":[],"doi":"10.17487\/RFC2169","errata_url":null}