Network Working Group | M. Douglass |
Internet-Draft | Bedework |
Updates: 2518 (if approved) | July 28, 2020 |
Intended status: Standards Track | |
Expires: January 29, 2021 |
Serverside Subscriptions
draft-ietf-calext-serverside-subscriptions-00
This specification provides a mechanism whereby subscriptions to external resources can be handled by the server.
This specification updates [RFC4791] to add new properties for the MKCOL request.
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 29, 2021.
Copyright (c) 2020 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 (https://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.
The motivation for this specification was initially to handle external subscriptions to calendar data. However, any resource which allows subscriptions might make use of this specification.
Currently subscriptions to calendar feeds are handled by calendar clients. There are a number of disadvantages to this approach: users have to subscribe from multiple devices and the subscription cannot affect scheduling handled by the server.
This specification defines a mechanism whereby the server will subscribe to the feed and make it visible in the user's home.
The advantages are popular feeds can be cached by the server and the user only has to make a single subscription.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
A client will subscribe to a URL by performing a MKCOL request with resource type elements of at least DAV:collection and DAV:subscription. For a calendar subscription there will also be a caldav calendar element.
>> Request << POST /caldav/user/mike/calendars/parrots HTTP/1.1 Host: example.com Content-Type: text/calendar; component=VEVENT; method=REQUEST Content-Length: xxxx <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> <D:mkcol xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:C="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:caldav"> <D:set> <D:prop> <D:resourcetype> <D:collection/> <C:calendar/> <D:subscription/> </D:resourcetype> <D:displayname>Parrot Events</D:displayname> <D:subscription-href>http://example.org/parrot-events.ics</D:subscription-href> <D:subscription-deletions-suppressed>true</D:subscription-deletions-suppressed> <D:subscription-suggested-refresh-interval>PT1H</D:subscription-suggested-refresh-interval> </D:prop> </D:set> </D:mkcol> >> Response << HTTP/1.1 200 OK
This is an example of the MKCOL request and response from a server that supports extended MKCOL.
<!ELEMENT subscription empty>
<!ELEMENT vpoll-max-items (#PCDATA)> PCDATA value: a url
<D:subscription-href xmlns:D="DAV" >https://example.com/events.ics</D:subscription-href>
<!ELEMENT subscription-deletions-suppressed empty>
<!ELEMENT subscription-enabled empty>
<!ELEMENT subscription-next-refresh-interval (#PCDATA)> PCDATA value: a duration value
<D:subscription-next-refresh-interval xmlns:D="DAV" >PT30M</D:subscription-next-refresh-interval>
<!ELEMENT subscription-suggested-refresh-interval (#PCDATA)> PCDATA value: a duration value
<D:subscription-suggested-refresh-interval xmlns:D="DAV" >PT30M</D:subscription-suggested-refresh-interval>
When creating the subscription the client may indicate to the server a desired refresh interval using the a refresh of the data is desired by using the PROPPATCH method to set the subscription-next-refresh-interval to 0, e.g. "PT0S".
The client may indicate to the server that a refresh of the data is desired by using the PROPPATCH method to set the subscription-next-refresh-interval to 0, e.g. "PT0S".
A server MAY choose to always ignore the attempted refresh or to ignore the patch if it appears too often.
If the server decides to initiate a refresh it MAY choose to respond with a 102 HTTP status indicating that it is still waiting for the data or a 202 HTTP status to indicate the request was accepted.
Implementations of this feature may have an outboard or background process handling the actaul synchronization of the data. The target may be hosted on a slow service or the data may be very large
All these factors may lead to a significant delay in having data ready for delivery to the client.
The following approaches are more or less appropriate for handling requests:
As mentioned above, this feature is particularly useful for CalDAV servers and clients. There are some specific considerations.
If subscription-deletions-suppressed is specified then the server SHOULD retain all events. However, the server MAY choose to remove old events once they become older than the CALDAV:min-date-time property as specified in [RFC4791] section 5.2.6.
A server SHOULD apply all appropriate restrictions on events obtained from a subscription. In particular the CALDAV:min-date-time and CALDAV:max-date-time properties as specified in [RFC4791] sections 5.2.6 and 5.2.7 SHOULD be applied.
Additionally the CALDAV:max-resource-size property restricts the size of events and the CALDAV:max-instances property the number of instances.
Any reason not to allow them?
Servers implementing this feature need to be aware of the risks entailed in using the URIs provided as values to subscription-href. See [RFC3986] for a discussion of the security considerations relating to URIs.
Properties with a "URI" value type can expose their users to privacy leaks as any network access of the URI data can be tracked. Clients SHOULD NOT automatically download data referenced by the URI without explicit instruction from users. This specification does not introduce any additional privacy concerns beyond those described in [RFC5545].
The author would also like to thank the members of the Calendaring and Scheduling Consortium Calendar Sharing technical committee and the following individuals for contributing their ideas and support:
...
The authors would also like to thank the Calendaring and Scheduling Consortium for advice with this specification.
[I-D.ietf-calext-extensions] | Daboo, C., "New Properties for iCalendar", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-calext-extensions-05, August 2016. |
[RFC2119] | Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997. |
[RFC2434] | Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 2434, DOI 10.17487/RFC2434, October 1998. |
[RFC2518] | Goland, Y., Whitehead, E., Faizi, A., Carter, S. and D. Jensen, "HTTP Extensions for Distributed Authoring -- WEBDAV", RFC 2518, DOI 10.17487/RFC2518, February 1999. |
[RFC3339] | Klyne, G. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, DOI 10.17487/RFC3339, July 2002. |
[RFC3688] | Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004. |
[RFC3986] | Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R. and L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005. |
[RFC4791] | Daboo, C., Desruisseaux, B. and L. Dusseault, "Calendaring Extensions to WebDAV (CalDAV)", RFC 4791, DOI 10.17487/RFC4791, March 2007. |
[RFC5545] | Desruisseaux, B., "Internet Calendaring and Scheduling Core Object Specification (iCalendar)", RFC 5545, DOI 10.17487/RFC5545, September 2009. |
[RFC5546] | Daboo, C., "iCalendar Transport-Independent Interoperability Protocol (iTIP)", RFC 5546, DOI 10.17487/RFC5546, December 2009. |
[RFC5988] | Nottingham, M., "Web Linking", RFC 5988, DOI 10.17487/RFC5988, October 2010. |
[RFC7240] | Snell, J., "Prefer Header for HTTP", RFC 7240, DOI 10.17487/RFC7240, June 2014. |
[W3C.REC-xml-20060816] | Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, M., Maler, E. and F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fourth Edition)", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-xml-20060816, August 2006. |
v00 2018-06-26 MD