Re: [occi-wg] Request for clarification: Are multiple lines allowed?
I believe that not is allowed. The newlines in this case are merely for readability purposes. Thijs? On 25 February 2013 16:44, Vincenzo Ciaschini < vincenzo.ciaschini@cnaf.infn.it> wrote:
Hi Andy,
Thanks for the fast answer!
A clarification is possibly needed: what we are discussing in the Federated Cloud group is not what happens when multiple headers are present, but if a single Category header element can be written on multiple lines. i.e. if the following representation of a category, taken from page 20:
Category: storage; scheme="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/infrastructure#"; class="kind"; title="Storage Resource"; rel="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/core#resource"; location="/storage/"; attributes="occi.storage.size{required} occi.storage.state{immutable}";
actions="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/infrastructure/storage/action#resize ...";
Is acceptable in the answer as is, with the newlines between elements and the indentation, or if it is supposed to be on a single line.
Thanks in advance, Vincenzo
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:10:00 +0100, Andy Edmonds wrote:
Hi Vincenzo Having a the same header repeated multiple times with different values is allowable by the HTTP spec. OCCI respects (OCCI always aims to respect the HTTP spec RFC2616) this hence why you may see two different renderings: one with all values "compressed" into one header line or multiple same headers with different values. If you "compress" each value must be ',' delineated. Note these rules also apply if the content is supplied in the body (OCCI specific).
HTH,
Andy
Andy Edmonds Æ Senior Researcher Institute of Information Technology Zürich University of Applied Sciences http://www.cloudcomp.ch [4], @dizz
On 25 February 2013 16:03, Vincenzo Ciaschini wrote:
Dear members of the occi-wg,
In the federated clouds working group, we are having a discussion about the interpretation of the HTTP rendering of the OCCI standard (document GFD.185, http://ogf.org/documents/GFD.185.pdf [1])
Our doubt is the following.
In several examples in the document, for examples in section 3.4, page 8 or in section 3.5.1, page 20, we see Category: elements laid out in multiple lines.
Our doubt is if this examples are normative, and thus it is acceptable to write them in multiple lines, or if this had been done just for readability, and the answers from the OCCI server should actually lay out a Category in a single line.
In the interest of interoperability among our different implementations, can you please clarify this point?
Thanks in advance, On behalf of the Federated Clouds Working Group _______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org [2] https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg [3]
Links: ------ [1] http://ogf.org/documents/GFD.185.pdf [2] mailto:occi-wg@ogf.org [3] https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg [4] http://www.cloudcomp.ch [5] mailto:vincenzo.ciaschini@cnaf.infn.it
Hi, You are allowed to split a header into multiple lines provided you indent them. See section 4.2 in RFC2616. <quote> Header fields can be extended over multiple lines by preceding each extra line with at least one SP or HT. </quote> regards, Ralf On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:53:01 +0100, Andy Edmonds <andrew.edmonds@zhaw.ch> wrote:
I believe that not is allowed. The newlines in this case are merely for readability purposes. Thijs?
On 25 February 2013 16:44, Vincenzo Ciaschini < vincenzo.ciaschini@cnaf.infn.it> wrote:
Hi Andy,
Thanks for the fast answer!
A clarification is possibly needed: what we are discussing in the Federated Cloud group is not what happens when multiple headers are present, but if a single Category header element can be written on multiple lines. i.e. if the following representation of a category, taken from page 20:
Category: storage; scheme="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/infrastructure#"; class="kind"; title="Storage Resource"; rel="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/core#resource"; location="/storage/"; attributes="occi.storage.size{required} occi.storage.state{immutable}";
actions="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/infrastructure/storage/action#resize ...";
Is acceptable in the answer as is, with the newlines between elements and the indentation, or if it is supposed to be on a single line.
Thanks in advance, Vincenzo
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:10:00 +0100, Andy Edmonds wrote:
Hi Vincenzo Having a the same header repeated multiple times with different values is allowable by the HTTP spec. OCCI respects (OCCI always aims to respect the HTTP spec RFC2616) this hence why you may see two different renderings: one with all values "compressed" into one header line or multiple same headers with different values. If you "compress" each value must be ',' delineated. Note these rules also apply if the content is supplied in the body (OCCI specific).
HTH,
Andy
Andy Edmonds Æ Senior Researcher Institute of Information Technology Zürich University of Applied Sciences http://www.cloudcomp.ch [4], @dizz
On 25 February 2013 16:03, Vincenzo Ciaschini wrote:
Dear members of the occi-wg,
In the federated clouds working group, we are having a discussion about the interpretation of the HTTP rendering of the OCCI standard (document GFD.185, http://ogf.org/documents/GFD.185.pdf [1])
Our doubt is the following.
In several examples in the document, for examples in section 3.4, page 8 or in section 3.5.1, page 20, we see Category: elements laid out in multiple lines.
Our doubt is if this examples are normative, and thus it is acceptable to write them in multiple lines, or if this had been done just for readability, and the answers from the OCCI server should actually lay out a Category in a single line.
In the interest of interoperability among our different implementations, can you please clarify this point?
Thanks in advance, On behalf of the Federated Clouds Working Group _______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org [2] https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg [3]
Links: ------ [1] http://ogf.org/documents/GFD.185.pdf [2] mailto:occi-wg@ogf.org [3] https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg [4] http://www.cloudcomp.ch [5] mailto:vincenzo.ciaschini@cnaf.infn.it
Ralf, I would agree with you on the section 4.2 in RFC 2616. It is clearly stated. However in the field it is often missing from implementations where we find: $a = split(":",$header); type stuff which will exception with extended line folded values. It has happened to me already and there is no way around it. SincerelyJamie
To: vincenzo.ciaschini@cnaf.infn.it; andrew.edmonds@zhaw.ch Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 22:32:39 +0100 From: ralf@nyren.net CC: occi-wg@ogf.org; fedcloud-tf@mailman.egi.eu Subject: Re: [occi-wg] Request for clarification: Are multiple lines allowed?
Hi,
You are allowed to split a header into multiple lines provided you indent them. See section 4.2 in RFC2616.
<quote> Header fields can be extended over multiple lines by preceding each extra line with at least one SP or HT. </quote>
regards, Ralf
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:53:01 +0100, Andy Edmonds <andrew.edmonds@zhaw.ch> wrote:
I believe that not is allowed. The newlines in this case are merely for readability purposes. Thijs?
On 25 February 2013 16:44, Vincenzo Ciaschini < vincenzo.ciaschini@cnaf.infn.it> wrote:
Hi Andy,
Thanks for the fast answer!
A clarification is possibly needed: what we are discussing in the Federated Cloud group is not what happens when multiple headers are present, but if a single Category header element can be written on multiple lines. i.e. if the following representation of a category, taken from page 20:
Category: storage; scheme="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/infrastructure#"; class="kind"; title="Storage Resource"; rel="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/core#resource"; location="/storage/"; attributes="occi.storage.size{required} occi.storage.state{immutable}";
actions="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/infrastructure/storage/action#resize ...";
Is acceptable in the answer as is, with the newlines between elements and the indentation, or if it is supposed to be on a single line.
Thanks in advance, Vincenzo
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:10:00 +0100, Andy Edmonds wrote:
Hi Vincenzo Having a the same header repeated multiple times with different values is allowable by the HTTP spec. OCCI respects (OCCI always aims to respect the HTTP spec RFC2616) this hence why you may see two different renderings: one with all values "compressed" into one header line or multiple same headers with different values. If you "compress" each value must be ',' delineated. Note these rules also apply if the content is supplied in the body (OCCI specific).
HTH,
Andy
Andy Edmonds Æ Senior Researcher Institute of Information Technology Zürich University of Applied Sciences http://www.cloudcomp.ch [4], @dizz
On 25 February 2013 16:03, Vincenzo Ciaschini wrote:
Dear members of the occi-wg,
In the federated clouds working group, we are having a discussion about the interpretation of the HTTP rendering of the OCCI standard (document GFD.185, http://ogf.org/documents/GFD.185.pdf [1])
Our doubt is the following.
In several examples in the document, for examples in section 3.4, page 8 or in section 3.5.1, page 20, we see Category: elements laid out in multiple lines.
Our doubt is if this examples are normative, and thus it is acceptable to write them in multiple lines, or if this had been done just for readability, and the answers from the OCCI server should actually lay out a Category in a single line.
In the interest of interoperability among our different implementations, can you please clarify this point?
Thanks in advance, On behalf of the Federated Clouds Working Group _______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org [2] https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg [3]
Links: ------ [1] http://ogf.org/documents/GFD.185.pdf [2] mailto:occi-wg@ogf.org [3] https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg [4] http://www.cloudcomp.ch [5] mailto:vincenzo.ciaschini@cnaf.infn.it
occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
Hi I'm thinking may want to consider a capabilities object. Similar to the approach taken with CDMI for json. I'm not sure if all transport paths will consistently handle header split. I also ran into the issue a few years back along with inconsistent header size limits The capabilities page can determine if the server supports splitting. Testing transport path is still a requirement. Gary Sent from my iPhone On Feb 25, 2013, at 2:41 PM, Jamie Marshall <ijm667@hotmail.com> wrote:
Ralf,
I would agree with you on the section 4.2 in RFC 2616. It is clearly stated. However in the field it is often missing from implementations where we find:
$a = split(":",$header);
type stuff which will exception with extended line folded values.
It has happened to me already and there is no way around it.
Sincerely Jamie
To: vincenzo.ciaschini@cnaf.infn.it; andrew.edmonds@zhaw.ch Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 22:32:39 +0100 From: ralf@nyren.net CC: occi-wg@ogf.org; fedcloud-tf@mailman.egi.eu Subject: Re: [occi-wg] Request for clarification: Are multiple lines allowed?
Hi,
You are allowed to split a header into multiple lines provided you indent them. See section 4.2 in RFC2616.
<quote> Header fields can be extended over multiple lines by preceding each extra line with at least one SP or HT. </quote>
regards, Ralf
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:53:01 +0100, Andy Edmonds <andrew.edmonds@zhaw.ch> wrote:
I believe that not is allowed. The newlines in this case are merely for readability purposes. Thijs?
On 25 February 2013 16:44, Vincenzo Ciaschini < vincenzo.ciaschini@cnaf.infn.it> wrote:
Hi Andy,
Thanks for the fast answer!
A clarification is possibly needed: what we are discussing in the Federated Cloud group is not what happens when multiple headers are present, but if a single Category header element can be written on multiple lines. i.e. if the following representation of a category, taken from page 20:
Category: storage; scheme="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/infrastructure#"; class="kind"; title="Storage Resource"; rel="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/core#resource"; location="/storage/"; attributes="occi.storage.size{required} occi.storage.state{immutable}";
actions="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/infrastructure/storage/action#resize ...";
Is acceptable in the answer as is, with the newlines between elements and the indentation, or if it is supposed to be on a single line.
Thanks in advance, Vincenzo
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:10:00 +0100, Andy Edmonds wrote:
Hi Vincenzo Having a the same header repeated multiple times with different values is allowable by the HTTP spec. OCCI respects (OCCI always aims to respect the HTTP spec RFC2616) this hence why you may see two different renderings: one with all values "compressed" into one header line or multiple same headers with different values. If you "compress" each value must be ',' delineated. Note these rules also apply if the content is supplied in the body (OCCI specific).
HTH,
Andy
Andy Edmonds Æ Senior Researcher Institute of Information Technology Zürich University of Applied Sciences http://www.cloudcomp.ch [4], @dizz
On 25 February 2013 16:03, Vincenzo Ciaschini wrote:
Dear members of the occi-wg,
In the federated clouds working group, we are having a discussion about the interpretation of the HTTP rendering of the OCCI standard (document GFD.185, http://ogf.org/documents/GFD.185.pdf [1])
Our doubt is the following.
In several examples in the document, for examples in section 3.4, page 8 or in section 3.5.1, page 20, we see Category: elements laid out in multiple lines.
Our doubt is if this examples are normative, and thus it is acceptable to write them in multiple lines, or if this had been done just for readability, and the answers from the OCCI server should actually lay out a Category in a single line.
In the interest of interoperability among our different implementations, can you please clarify this point?
Thanks in advance, On behalf of the Federated Clouds Working Group _______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org [2] https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg [3]
Links: ------ [1] http://ogf.org/documents/GFD.185.pdf [2] mailto:occi-wg@ogf.org [3] https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg [4] http://www.cloudcomp.ch [5] mailto:vincenzo.ciaschini@cnaf.infn.it
occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
participants (4)
-
Andy Edmonds -
Gary Mazzaferro -
Jamie Marshall -
Ralf Nyren