GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc4227

Network Working Group E. O'Tuathail Request for Comments: 4227 Clipcode.com Obsoletes: 3288 M. Rose Category: Standards Track Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.

                                                          January 2006
           Using the Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP)
           in Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol (BEEP)

Status of This Memo

 This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
 Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
 improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
 Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
 and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).

Abstract

 This memo specifies a Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) binding to
 the Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol (BEEP) core.  A SOAP binding
 describes how SOAP messages are transmitted in the network.
 The SOAP is an XML-based (eXtensible Markup Language) messaging
 protocol used to implement a wide variety of distributed messaging
 models.  It defines a message format and describes a variety of
 message patterns, including, but not limited to, Remote Procedure
 Calling (RPC), asynchronous event notification, unacknowledged
 messages, and forwarding via SOAP intermediaries.

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 1] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

Table of Contents

 1. Introduction ....................................................3
 2. BEEP Profile Identification .....................................3
    2.1. Profile Initialization .....................................4
 3. SOAP Message Packages ...........................................6
 4. SOAP Message Patterns ...........................................8
    4.1. One-Way Message ............................................8
    4.2. Request-Response Exchange ..................................8
    4.3. Request/N-Responses Exchange ...............................8
    4.4. Error Handling .............................................9
 5. SOAP Protocol Binding Framework Conformance .....................9
    5.1. Binding Name ...............................................9
    5.2. Base URI ...................................................9
    5.3. Supported SOAP Message Exchange Patterns ...................9
    5.4. Supported Features .........................................9
    5.5. MEP Operation .............................................10
         5.5.1. Behavior of Requesting SOAP Node ...................10
                5.5.1.1. Init ......................................10
                5.5.1.2. Requesting ................................10
                5.5.1.3. Sending+Receiving .........................10
                5.5.1.4. Success and Fail ..........................11
         5.5.2. Behavior of Responding SOAP Node ...................11
                5.5.2.1. Init ......................................11
                5.5.2.2. Receiving .................................11
                5.5.2.3. Receiving+Sending .........................11
                5.5.2.4. Success and Fail ..........................11
 6. URL Schemes ....................................................11
    6.1. The soap.beep URL Scheme ..................................11
         6.1.1. Resolving IP/TCP Address Information ...............12
    6.2. The soap.beeps URL Scheme .................................13
 7. Registration Templates .........................................13
    7.1. SOAP Profile Feature Registration Template ................13
 8. Initial Registrations ..........................................13
    8.1. Registration: The SOAP Profile ............................13
    8.2. Registration: The soap.beep URL Scheme ....................14
    8.3. Registration: The soap.beeps URL Scheme ...................14
    8.4. Registration: The System (Well-Known) TCP Port
         Number for SOAP ...........................................15
 9. Security Considerations ........................................15
 10. IANA Considerations ...........................................16
 11. Changes from RFC 3288 .........................................16
 12. Acknowledgements ..............................................17
 13. References ....................................................17
    13.1. Normative References .....................................17
    13.2. Informative References ...................................18
 A. Appendix - SOAP with Attachments (Informative) .................19

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

1. Introduction

 This memo specifies how SOAP envelopes [15] are transmitted using a
 BEEP profile [1].  Conforming implementations MUST support SOAP
 version 1.2 [15] and MAY support other versions, such as SOAP version
 1.1 [17].  This memo specifies how SOAP envelopes [15] are
 transmitted using a BEEP profile [1].  Unlike its predecessor,
 RFC3288 [16], this memo does not mandate the use of SOAP version 1.1.
 Throughout this memo, the term "envelope" refers to the top-level
 element exchanged by SOAP senders and receivers.  For example, when
 referring to SOAP version 1.2, the term "envelope" refers to the
 "Envelope" element defined in Section 5.1 of [2].  Furthermore, the
 terms "peer", "client", "server", "one-to-one", and "one-to-many" are
 used in the context of BEEP.  In particular, Sections 2.1 and 2.1.1
 of [1] discuss BEEP roles and exchange styles.

2. BEEP Profile Identification

 The BEEP profile for SOAP is identified as
     http://iana.org/beep/soap/VERSION
 in the BEEP "profile" element during channel creation. where
 "VERSION" refers to the numeric version of the SOAP specification.
 For example,
     http://iana.org/beep/soap/1.2
 refers to version 1.2.
 Note that RFC 3288 [16] used
     http://iana.org/beep/soap
 for the purposes of profile identification for SOAP version 1.1
 envelopes [17].  If an implementation of this memo chooses to
 implement SOAP version 1.1, then it should support both this Uniform
 Resource Identifier (URI) for profile identification as well as
 "http://iana.org/beep/soap/1.1".
 In BEEP, when the first channel is successfully created, the
 "serverName" attribute in the "start" element identifies the "virtual
 host" associated with the peer acting in the server role, e.g.,

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 3] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

     <start number='1' serverName='stockquoteserver.example.com'>
         <profile uri='http://iana.org/beep/soap/1.2' />
     </start>
 The "serverName" attribute is analogous to HTTP's "Host" request-
 header field (cf. Section 14.23 of [4]).
 There are two states in the BEEP profile for SOAP, "boot" and
 "ready":
 o  In the "boot" state, the peer requesting the creation of the
    channel sends a "bootmsg" (either during channel initialization or
    in a "MSG" message).
  • If the other peer sends a "bootrpy" (either during channel

initialization or in an "RPY" message), then the "ready" state

       is entered
  • Otherwise, the other peer sends an "error" (either during

channel initialization or in an "ERR" message), then no state

       change occurs.
 o  In the "ready" state, either peer begins a SOAP message pattern by
    sending a "MSG" message containing an envelope.  The other peer
    completes the message pattern either by
  • sending back an "RPY" message containing an envelope or
  • sending back zero or more "ANS" messages, each containing an

envelope, followed by a "NUL" message.

    Regardless, no state change occurs.

2.1. Profile Initialization

 The boot message is used for two purposes:
    resource identification: each channel bound to the BEEP profile
    for SOAP provides access to a single resource (a network data
    object or service).
    feature negotiation: if new features of SOAP (such as compression)
    emerge, their use can be negotiated.

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 4] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

 The DTD syntax for the boot message and its response are:
     <!ELEMENT bootmsg     EMPTY>
     <!ATTLIST bootmsg
               resource    CDATA             #REQUIRED
               features    NMTOKENS          "">
     <!ELEMENT bootrpy     EMPTY>
     <!ATTLIST bootrpy
               features    NMTOKENS          "">
 The boot message contains a mandatory and an optional attribute:
 o  the "resource" attribute, which is analogous to HTTP's "abs_path"
    Request-URI parameter (cf. Section 5.1.2 of [4]) and
 o  the "features" attribute, which, if present, contains one or more
    feature tokens, each indicating an optional feature of the BEEP
    profile for SOAP that is being requested for possible use over the
    channel.
 Section 7.1 defines a registration template for optional features.
 If the peer acting in the server role recognizes the requested
 resource, it replies with the boot response that contains one
 optional attribute:
 o  The "features" attribute, if present, contains a subset of the
    feature tokens in the boot message, indicating which features may
    be used over the channel.  (If not present or empty, then no
    features may be used.)
 Otherwise, if the boot message is improperly formed, or if the
 requested resource is not recognized, the peer acting in the server
 role replies with an error message (cf. Section 7.1 of [1]).
 Typically, the boot message and its response are exchanged during
 channel initialization (cf. Section 2.3.1.2 of [1]).
 For example, here the boot message and its response are exchanged
 during channel initialization:
     C: <start number='1' serverName='stockquoteserver.example.com'>
     C:     <profile uri='http://iana.org/beep/soap/1.2'>
     C:         <![CDATA[<bootmsg resource='/StockQuote' />]]>
     C:     </profile>
     C: </start>

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 5] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

     S: <profile uri='http://iana.org/beep/soap/1.2'>
     S:     <![CDATA[<bootrpy />]]>
     S: </profile>
 The channel bound to the BEEP profile for SOAP is now in the "ready"
 state.
 Alternatively, here is an example in which the boot exchange is
 unsuccessful:
     C: <start number='1' serverName='stockquoteserver.example.com'>
     C:     <profile uri='http://iana.org/beep/soap/1.2'>
     C:         <![CDATA[<bootmsg resource='/StockPick' />]]>
     C:     </profile>
     C: </start>
     S: <profile uri='http://iana.org/beep/soap/1.2'>
     S:     <![CDATA[<error code='550'>resource not
     S:                                supported</error>]]>
     S: </profile>
 Although the channel was created successfully, it remains in the
 "boot" state.

3. SOAP Message Packages

 The BEEP profile for SOAP transmits envelopes encoded as UTF-8 and
 SHOULD use the media type "application/soap+xml" [5], e.g.,
 MSG 1 1 . 0 284
 Content-Type: application/soap+xml
 <env:Envelope
      xmlns:env="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap-envelope">
   <env:Header>
    <m:GetLastTradePrice xmlns:m="Some-URI" />
   </env:Header>
   <env:Body>
     <symbol xmlns:p="Some-URI" >DIS</symbol>
   </env:Body>
 </env:Envelope>
 END
 To provide compatibility with RFC 3288 [16], it MAY use the media
 type "application/xml" [6].

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 6] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

 In addition, an implementation of the BEEP profile for SOAP MAY
 support transmission of envelopes using the MTOM [7] / XOP [8]
 packaging technique, e.g.,
 MSG 1 2 . 283 1436
 MIME-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: Multipart/Related;boundary=MIME_boundary;
     type="application/xop+xml";
     start="<mymessage.xml@example.org>";
     startinfo="application/soap+xml; action=
 Content-Description: A SOAP message with my pic and sig in it
  1. -MIME_boundary

Content-Type: application/xop+xml;

     charset=UTF-8;
     type="application/soap+xml; action=
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
 Content-ID: <mymessage.xml@example.org>
 <soap:Envelope
     xmlns:soap='http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap-envelope'
     xmlns:xmlmime='http://www.w3.org/2004/11/xmlmime'>
   <soap:Body>
     <m:data xmlns:m='http://example.org/stuff'>
       <m:photo
   xmlmime:contentType='image/png'><xop:Include
     xmlns:xop='http://www.w3.org/2004/08/xop/include'
     href='cid:http://example.org/me.png'/></m:photo>
       <m:sig
   xmlmime:contentType='application/pkcs7-signature'><xop:Include
     xmlns:xop='http://www.w3.org/2004/08/xop/include'
     href='cid:http://example.org/my.hsh'/></m:sig>
     </m:data>
   </soap:Body>
 </soap:Envelope>
  1. -MIME_boundary

Content-Type: image/png

 Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
 Content-ID: <http://example.org/me.png>
 // binary octets for png
  1. -MIME_boundary

Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature

 Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
 Content-ID: <http://example.org/my.hsh>

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 7] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

 // binary octets for signature
  1. -MIME_boundary–

END

 Consult Section 4.1 of XOP [8] for guidance on MIME Multipart/Related
 usage.  Because BEEP provides an 8-bit-wide path, a "transformative"
 Content-Transfer-Encoding (e.g., "base64" or "quoted-printable")
 should not be used.  Note that MIME [9] requires that the value of
 the "Content-ID" header be globally unique.  As stated in Section 4
 of XOP [8], XOP may be used with diverse packaging mechanisms.  When
 an implementation of BEEP in SOAP does support MTOM/XOP, it SHOULD
 support the MIME Multipart/Related XOP Package format, and MAY
 support others.  Additional formats could, in the future, include XOP
 package formats specific to BEEP (e.g., sending the attachments on a
 different channel to the SOAP channel, which would avoid searching
 for the MIME boundary tags and allows lazy delivery of attachments,
 delivering them only when really needed.)

4. SOAP Message Patterns

4.1. One-Way Message

 A one-way message involves sending a message without any response
 being returned.
 The BEEP profile for SOAP achieves this using a one-to-many exchange,
 in which the client sends a "MSG" message containing an envelope, and
 the server immediately sends back a "NUL" message, before processing
 the contents of the envelope.

4.2. Request-Response Exchange

 A request/response exchange involves sending a request, which results
 in a response being returned.
 The BEEP profile for SOAP achieves this using a one-to-one exchange,
 in which the client sends a "MSG" message containing an envelope, and
 the server sends back a "RPY" message containing an envelope.

4.3. Request/N-Responses Exchange

 A request/N-responses exchange involves sending a request, which
 results in zero or more responses being returned.

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 8] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

 The BEEP profile for SOAP achieves this using a one-to-many exchange,
 in which the client sends a "MSG" message containing an envelope, and
 the server sends back zero or more "ANS" messages, each containing an
 envelope, followed by a "NUL" message.

4.4. Error Handling

 The BEEP profile for SOAP does not use the "ERR" message for SOAP
 faults.  When performing one-to-one exchanges, whatever SOAP response
 (including SOAP faults) generated by the server is always returned in
 the "RPY" message.  When performing one-to-many exchanges, whatever
 SOAP response (including SOAP faults) generated by the server is
 always returned in the "ANS" messages.
 If there is an error with the BEEP message unrelated to the SOAP
 envelope (e.g., poorly formed MIME message or MIME Content-Type not
 supported), then the server responds with an ERR message (see Section
 7.1 of [1]) with an appropriate reply code (e.g., see Section 8 of
 [1]).

5. SOAP Protocol Binding Framework Conformance

5.1. Binding Name

 This binding is identified by a URI that is exactly the same as the
 profile URI for BEEP in SOAP (see Section 2).

5.2. Base URI

 The Base URI for the SOAP envelope is the URI of the resource
 identified in the bootmsg.

5.3. Supported SOAP Message Exchange Patterns

 An implementation of this binding MUST support the following SOAP
 Message Exchange Pattern (MEP):
 o  "http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/mep/request-response/" (see
    Section 6.2 of [3])

5.4. Supported Features

 An implementation of this binding MAY support the following feature:
 "http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/features/action/" (see Section 6.5 of
 [3].)

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 9] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

5.5. MEP Operation

 For binding instances conforming to this specification:
 o  A SOAP node instantiated at the BEEP peer that initiates the
    message exchange may assume the role (i.e., the property http://
    www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/bindingFramework/ExchangeContext/Role ) of
    "RequestingSOAPNode".
 o  A SOAP node instantiated at the other BEEP peer may assume the
    role (i.e., the property http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/
    bindingFramework/ExchangeContext/Role) of "RespondingSOAPNode".

5.5.1. Behavior of Requesting SOAP Node

 The overall flow of the behavior of a requesting SOAP node follows a
 state machine description consistent with Section 6.2 of [3].
 In order to avoid deadlock during streaming (see Section 6.2.3 of
 [3]), the requesting SOAP node MUST be able to process incoming SOAP
 response information while the SOAP request is still being
 transmitted.

5.5.1.1. Init

 In the "Init" state, a BEEP message is formulated according to
 Section 3, transmission of the message begins, and then the state
 changes to "Requesting".

5.5.1.2. Requesting

 In the "Requesting" state, more of the request message is transmitted
 and the arrival of the response is awaited.  When the beginning of
 the response message is received, if it is a BEEP ERR message, then
 the state transitions to "Fail"; otherwise, the state transitions to
 "Sending+Receiving".

5.5.1.3. Sending+Receiving

 In the "Sending+Receiving" state, the transmission of the request
 message and receiving of the response message are completed.  The
 response message is assumed to contain a SOAP envelope serialized
 according to the rules for carrying SOAP messages in the media type
 given in the Content-Type header field.  Once the receipt of the
 response is completed, the state transitions to "Success".

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 10] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

5.5.1.4. Success and Fail

 "Success" and "Fail" are the terminal states for the state machine.

5.5.2. Behavior of Responding SOAP Node

 The overall flow of the behavior of a responding SOAP node follows a
 state machine description consistent with Section 6.2 of [3]

5.5.2.1. Init

 In the "Init" state, the binding awaits the start of the inbound
 request.  In this state, it may only generate ERR messages (in
 accordance with Section 4.4).

5.5.2.2. Receiving

 The binding begins to receive the request message and prepares the
 start of the response, in accordance with Section 3.  When ready to
 transmit the response, the state transitions to "Receiving+Sending".

5.5.2.3. Receiving+Sending

 The binding completes the receiving of the request and sending of the
 response and then transitions to "Success" state.

5.5.2.4. Success and Fail

 "Success" and "Fail" are the terminal states that indicate completion
 of the message exchange.

6. URL Schemes

 This memo defines two URL schemes, "soap.beep" and "soap.beeps",
 which identify the use of SOAP over BEEP over TCP.  Note that, at
 present, a "generic" URL scheme for SOAP is not defined.

6.1. The soap.beep URL Scheme

 The "soap.beep" URL scheme uses the "generic URI" syntax defined in
 Section 3 of [10], specifically:
 o  the value "soap.beep" is used for the scheme component and
 o  the server-based naming authority defined in Section 3.2.2 of [10]
    is used for the authority component.

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 11] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

 o  the path component maps to the "resource" component of the boot
    message sent during profile initialization (if absent, it defaults
    to "/").
 The values of both the scheme and authority components are case-
 insensitive.
 For example, the URL
     soap.beep://stockquoteserver.example.com/StockQuote
 might result in the example shown in Section 2.1.

6.1.1. Resolving IP/TCP Address Information

 The "soap.beep" URL scheme indicates the use of the BEEP profile for
 SOAP running over TCP/IP.
 If the authority component contains a domain name and a port number,
 e.g.,
     soap.beep://stockquoteserver.example.com:1026
 then the DNS is queried for the A Resource Records corresponding to
 the domain name, and the port number is used directly.
 If the authority component contains a domain name and no port number,
 e.g.,
     soap.beep://stockquoteserver.example.com
 the Service Record algorithm [11] is used with a service parameter of
 "soap-beep" and a protocol parameter of "tcp" to determine the IP/TCP
 addressing information.  If no appropriate SRV RRs are found (e.g.,
 for "_soap-beep._tcp.stockquoteserver.example.com"), then the DNS is
 queried for the A RRs corresponding to the domain name and the port
 number used is assigned by the IANA for the registration in Section
 8.4.
 If the authority component contains an IP address, e.g.,
     soap.beep://192.0.2.0:1026
 then the DNS is not queried, and the IP address is used directly.  If
 a port number is present, it is used directly; otherwise, the port
 number used is assigned by the IANA for the registration in Section
 8.4.

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 12] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

 While the use of literal IPv6 addresses in URLs is discouraged, if a
 literal IPv6 address is used in a "soap.beep" URL, it must conform to
 the syntax specified in [12].

6.2. The soap.beeps URL Scheme

 The "soap.beeps" URL scheme is identical, in all ways, to the
 "soap.beep" URL scheme specified in Section 6.1, with the exception
 that prior to starting the BEEP profile for SOAP, the BEEP session
 must be tuned for privacy.  In particular, note that both URL schemes
 use the identical algorithms and parameters for address resolution as
 specified in Section 6.1.1 (e.g., the same service name for SRV
 lookups, the same port number for TCP, and so on).
 There are two ways to perform privacy tuning on a BEEP session,
 either
 o  a transport security profile may be successfully started or
 o  a user authentication profile that supports transport security may
    be successfully started.
 Regardless, upon completion of the negotiation process, a tuning
 reset occurs in which both BEEP peers issue a new greeting.  Consult
 Section 3 of [1] for an example of how a BEEP peer may choose to
 issue different greetings based on whether privacy is in use.

7. Registration Templates

7.1. SOAP Profile Feature Registration Template

 When a feature for the BEEP profile for SOAP is registered, the
 following information is supplied:
 Feature Identification: specify a string that identifies this
    feature.  Unless the feature is registered with the IANA, the
    feature's identification must start with "x-".
 Feature Semantics: specify the semantics of the feature.
 Contact Information: specify the electronic contact information for
    the author of the feature.

8. Initial Registrations

8.1. Registration: The SOAP Profile

 Profile Identification: http://iana.org/beep/soap/VERSION

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 13] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

 Messages exchanged during Channel Creation: bootmsg, bootrpy
 Messages starting one-to-one exchanges: bootmsg, a SOAP "envelope"
 Messages in positive replies: bootrpy, a SOAP "envelope"
 Messages in negative replies: error
 Messages in one-to-many exchanges: a SOAP "envelope"
 Message Syntax: a SOAP envelope
 Message Semantics: corresponds to the relevant SOAP specification,
    e.g., for SOAP version 1.2, cf. [2].
 Contact Information: Eamon O'Tuathail <eamon.otuathail@clipcode.com>,
    Marshall Rose <mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us>

8.2. Registration: The soap.beep URL Scheme

 URL scheme name: soap.beep
 URL scheme syntax: cf. Section 6.1
 Character encoding considerations: cf. the "generic URI" syntax
    defined in Section 3 of [10]
 Intended usage: identifies a SOAP resource made available using the
    BEEP profile for SOAP
 Applications using this scheme: cf. "Intended usage", above
 Interoperability considerations: n/a
 Security Considerations: cf. Section 9
 Relevant Publications: cf. [2] for SOAP version 1.2
 Contact Information: Eamon O'Tuathail <eamon.otuathail@clipcode.com>,
    Marshall Rose <mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
 Author/Change controller: the IESG

8.3. Registration: The soap.beeps URL Scheme

 URL scheme name: soap.beeps
 URL scheme syntax: cf. Section 6.2

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 14] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

 Character encoding considerations: cf. the "generic URI" syntax
    defined in Section 3 of [10]
 Intended usage: identifies a SOAP resource made available using the
    BEEP profile for SOAP after the BEEP session has been tuned for
    privacy
 Applications using this scheme: cf. "Intended usage", above
 Interoperability considerations: n/a
 Security Considerations: cf. Section 9
 Relevant Publications: cf. [2] for SOAP version 1.2
 Contact Information: Eamon O'Tuathail <eamon.otuathail@clipcode.com>,
    Marshall Rose <mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
 Author/Change controller: the IESG

8.4. Registration: The System (Well-Known) TCP Port Number for SOAP

    over BEEP
 Protocol Number: TCP
 Message Formats, Types, Opcodes, and Sequences: cf. Section 2.1
 Functions: cf. [2] for SOAP version 1.2
 Use of Broadcast/Multicast: none
 Proposed Name: SOAP over BEEP
 Short name: soap-beep
 Contact Information: Eamon O'Tuathail <eamon.otuathail@clipcode.com>,
    Marshall Rose <mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us>

9. Security Considerations

 Although service provisioning is a policy matter, at a minimum, all
 implementations MUST provide the following tuning profiles:
 for authentication: http://iana.org/beep/SASL/DIGEST-MD5
 for confidentiality: http://iana.org/beep/TLS (using the
    TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_EDE_CBC_SHA cipher)

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 15] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

 for both: http://iana.org/beep/TLS (using the
    TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_EDE_CBC_SHA cipher supporting client-side
    certificates)
 Furthermore, implementations may choose to offer MIME-based security
 services providing message integrity and confidentiality, such as
 OpenPGP [13] or S/MIME [14].
 Regardless, consult [1]'s Section 9 for a discussion of BEEP-specific
 security issues.

10. IANA Considerations

 Previously, the IANA registered "http://iana.org/beep/soap" for use
 with RFC 3288 [16].  This memo requires that the IANA register a
 URI-prefix of
     http://iana.org/beep/soap/VERSION
 to correspond to the family of profiles defined Section 8.1.
 The IANA has registered "soap.beep" and "soap.beeps" as URL schemes,
 as specified in Section 8.2 and Section 8.3, respectively.
 The IANA has also registered "SOAP over BEEP" as a TCP port number,
 as specified in Section 8.4.
 The IANA now broadens these three registries to support the family of
 BEEP profiles defined by this URI prefix.
 Finally, the IANA maintains a list of SOAP profile features, cf.
 Section 7.1.  The IESG is responsible for assigning a designated
 expert to review the specification prior to the IANA making the
 assignment.  Prior to contacting the IESG, developers of SOAP profile
 features must use the mailing list beepwg@lists.beepcore.org to
 solicit commentary.

11. Changes from RFC 3288

 This memo differs from RFC 3288 [16] in one substantive way: a URL
 prefix is defined to support a family of BEEP profiles corresponding
 to different versions of SOAP.  Similarly, the IANA registrations in
 Section 8.1, Section 8.3, and Section 8.4 are updated to reflect this
 broadening.
 Support for W3C MTOM/XOP packaging has been added.

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 16] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

 A new section was added to discuss the distributed state machine of
 the Request-Response MEP.
 In non-substantive ways, a small number of typographical errors were
 corrected.

12. Acknowledgements

 The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of: Christopher
 Ferris, Huston Franklin, Alexey Melnikov, Bill Mills, and Roy T.
 Fielding.

13. References

13.1. Normative References

 [1]   Rose, M., "The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core", RFC
       3080, March 2001.
 [2]   Nielsen, H., Mendelsohn, N., Gudgin, M., Hadley, M., and J.
       Moreau, "SOAP Version 1.2 Part 1: Messaging Framework", W3C REC
       REC-soap12-part1-20030624, June 2003.
 [3]   Nielsen, H., Hadley, M., Moreau, J., Mendelsohn, N., and M.
       Gudgin, "SOAP Version 1.2 Part 2: Adjuncts", W3C REC REC-
       soap12-part2-20030624, June 2003.
 [4]   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.
 [5]   Baker, M. and M. Nottingham, "The "application/soap+xml" media
       type", RFC 3902, September 2004.
 [6]   Murata, M., St. Laurent, S., and D. Kohn, "XML Media Types",
       RFC 3023, January 2001.
 [7]   Nottingham, M., Mendelsohn, N., Gudgin, M., and H. Ruellan,
       "SOAP Message Transmission Optimization Mechanism", W3C REC
       REC-soap12-mtom-20050125, January 2005.
 [8]   Nottingham, M., Mendelsohn, N., Gudgin, M., and H. Ruellan,
       "XML-binary Optimized Packaging", W3C REC REC-xop10-20050125,
       January 2005.
 [9]   Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail
       Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies",
       RFC 2045, November 1996.

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 17] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

 [10]  Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
       Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC 3986,
       January 2005.
 [11]  Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for
       specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782,
       February 2000.
 [12]  Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
       Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC 3986,
       January 2005.
 [13]  Elkins, M., Del Torto, D., Levien, R., and T. Roessler, "MIME
       Security with OpenPGP", RFC 3156, August 2001.
 [14]  Ramsdell, B., "Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions
       (S/MIME) Version 3.1 Message Specification", RFC 3851, July
       2004.

13.2. Informative References

 [15]  Mitra, N., "SOAP Version 1.2 Part 0: Primer", W3C REC REC-
       soap12-part0-20030624, June 2003.
 [16]  O'Tuathail, E. and M. Rose, "Using the Simple Object Access
       Protocol (SOAP) in Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol (BEEP)",
       RFC 3288, June 2002.
 [17]  Box, D., Ehnebuske, D., Kakivaya, G., Layman, A., Mendelsohn,
       N., Nielsen, H., Thatte, S., and D. Winer, "Simple Object
       Access Protocol (SOAP) 1.1", W3C NOTE NOTE-SOAP-20000508, May
       2000.
 [18]  Levinson, E., "The MIME Multipart/Related Content-type", RFC
       2387, August 1998.
 [19]  Barton, J., Thatte, S., and H. Nielsen, "SOAP Messages with
       Attachments", W3C NOTE NOTE-SOAP-attachments-20001211, December
       2000.
 [20]  Levinson, E., "Content-ID and Message-ID Uniform Resource
       Locators", RFC 2392, August 1998.
 [21]  Palme, J., Hopmann, A., and N. Shelness, "MIME Encapsulation of
       Aggregate Documents, such as HTML (MHTML)", RFC 2557, March
       1999.

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 18] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

Appendix A. SOAP with Attachments (Informative)

 To provide compatibility with RFC3288 [16], a BEEP profile for SOAP
 MAY allow envelopes to be transmitted as the root part of a
 "multipart/related" [18] content, and with subordinate parts
 referenced using the rules of Section 3 of [19] (i.e., using either
 the "Content-ID:" [20] or "Content-Location:" [21] headers), e.g.,
  MSG 1 2 . 278 657
  Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="MIME_boundary";
                type=application/xml;
                start="<claim061400a.xml@claiming-it.com>"
  1. -MIME_boundary

Content-Type: application/xml

  Content-ID: <claim061400a.xml@claiming-it.com>
  <?xml version='1.0' ?>
  <env:Envelope
       xmlns:env="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap-envelope">
   ..
  </env:Header>
  <env:Body>
  <theSignedForm href="cid:claim061400a.tiff@claiming-it.com" />
   ..
  </env:Body>
  </env:Envelope>
  1. -MIME_boundary

Content-Type: image/tiff

  Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
  Content-ID: <claim061400a.tiff@claiming-it.com>
   ...binary TIFF image...
  --MIME_boundary--
  END
 Consistent with Section 2 of [19], it is strongly recommended that
 the multipart contain a "start" parameter, and that the root part
 contain a "Content-ID:" header.  However, because BEEP provides an
 8bit-wide path, a "transformative" Content-Transfer-Encoding (e.g.,
 "base64" or "quoted-printable") should not be used.  Further note
 that MIME [9] requires that the value of the "Content-ID" header be
 globally unique.

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 19] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

Authors' Addresses

 Eamon O'Tuathail
 Clipcode.com
 24 Thomastown Road
 Dun Laoghaire
 Dublin
 IE
 Phone: +353 1 2350 424
 EMail: eamon.otuathail@clipcode.com
 URI:   http://www.clipcode.com/
 Marshall T. Rose
 Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.
 POB 255268
 Sacramento, CA  95865-5268
 US
 Phone: +1 916 483 8878
 EMail: mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 20] RFC 4227 Using SOAP in BEEP January 2006

Full Copyright Statement

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
 This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
 contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
 retain all their rights.
 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
 ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.

Intellectual Property

 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
 made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
 http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
 this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
 ietf-ipr@ietf.org.

Acknowledgement

 Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
 Administrative Support Activity (IASA).

O'Tuathail & Rose Standards Track [Page 21]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc4227.txt · Last modified: 2006/01/05 17:16 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki