R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, T. Berners-Lee, et al., "RFC 2068.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....loading images from other sources. For accessing the database on the webserver, the program contains a fully functional database viewer with methods of finding and sorting data from the PACS database. The images are cached on the web server. The client program loads the images either using HTTP [7] or its own CHILI Web protocol. Optionally, the data stream can be encrypted Fig. 1. CHILI Web with database in teleconference mode (see mouse pointer of conference partner and open telephone) with the SSL3 TLS secure socket layer protocol [8] The CHILI protocol also supports lossless and lossy ....

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, T. Berners-Lee, RFC 2068.

....Native Interface (JNI) for performance reasons. In order to adhere to standards, we used XML [18] to encode all the messages and SSL [10] to encrypt them. The coupon mint component receives blank coupon requests from the manufacturers and verification re quests from the retailers as HTTP POST [3, 8] mes sages and sends blank coupons or a certificates of use as an XML document in responses. The manufacturer component allows multiple manufacturers to define different promotions, through a Web based interface. For each promotion, the manufacturer supplies the promotion details, such as the ....

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, and T. Berners-Lee. RFC 2068.

....to deliver the most up to date copy to the receivers, a pooling every time mechanism must be used. The cache sends an if modified since request every time that a request for a document hits the cache [14] Some new protocol headers concerning caching have been introduced in version 1. 1 of HTTP [10], which is currently being deployed. This new headers provide significant improvement over the mechanisms used in HTTP 1.0. The new headers allow the origin servers to specify the maximum time that a document may be kept at the caches. Additionally, clients can specify the degree of staleness ....

....more than three levels [6] 2) TCP delay, which is due to the slow start phase of the different TCP connections between every cache level [17] The slow start is more relevant when the completion time of the document is small. The effect of this delay is reduced with persistent TCP connections [10]; 3) Server delay, which is due to busy servers that need to deal with many requests for document updates from several national caches. 4) Queuing delay, which is due to queues on busy caches. In this paper we pay a particular attention to the impact of the queuing delays experienced on the ....

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, T. Berners-Lee, et al., "RFC 2068.

....information contained in both. IP telephony services can be deployed using one of two different protocols. The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has developed a plain text protocol called Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) 23] based on the structure of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) [18]. The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) developed H.323 [31] which inherited the structure and basic functionality from the Signaling System 7 (SS7) 47] protocol used within the PSTN. The two protocols are not directly compatible but provide comparable features. H.323 was developed ....

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, and T. Berners Lee. RFC 2068.

....still fresh. The push service is specially suited for busy individuals and for delivering transient data such as stock quotes, product prices, news headlines, and weather information. However, designers of large scale Web based change monitoring and notification systems face a common problem: HTTP [13] is a pure request response model and it does not allow servers to asynchronously notify clients of events on the server side. As a result, search engines to date, although powerful in helping users locating and finding information of interest, do not support tracking changes on behalf of users ....

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, and e. T. Berners-Lee. RFC 2068.

....but one that would also be easily deployable out in the eld. Hence, we exclude from consideration designs that would require special purpose modi cation of existing web browsers or web servers. Similarly, few people would adopt a solution that was non compliant with the existing HTTP standards [2] due 16 to a fear of introducing unforeseen incompatibilities into their browsing experiences. Finally, we exclude solutions that force users to accept stale content in exchange for improved delivery speed. Such solutions hint of geographic discrimination and further reinforce the digital ....

....Consequently, these le formats are immune to standard lossless compression algorithms. On the other hand, the best known text compression algorithms, such as PPM (Prediction by Partial Matching) typically achieve 2:1 savings on small les. This is a signi cant result. Though the HTTP standard [2] supports the transfer of compressed 19 web content (other than headers) webmasters rarely exploit this feature. Apache, for example, will send a compressed le in lieu of a raw le only when a compressed version of the le is pre existing on disk. To conserve processor cycles, no online ....

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, and T. Berners-Lee. RFC 2068.

....(except for the idle times between block requests) When the client receives all blocks it resembles them and reconstructs the whole document. Negotiations between the client and the servers indicating which block to get, are performed at the application level using the HTTP1.1 byte range header [14]. Multiple application level negotiations for the same document and the same server server use the same TCP persistent connection to avoid multiple slow start phases [23] For every negotiation between the client and each server, there is a round trip time (RTT) during which no data is ....

....into a single document) We assume that the path from the client to the mirror servers is bottleneck disjoint, that is, packets from one mirror server are not slowed down or dropped due to packets from another mirror server. We consider that servers and clients implement the HTTP 1. 1 protocol [14] to allow for persistent connections and applicationlevel negotiations. 1.3 Mirror Site Discovery Concerning the discovery of mirror sites, the most frequent approach is to publish a list of mirror sites on the master Web site. Clients, manually select the server that they believe will offer the ....

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, T. Berners-Lee, et al., "RFC 2068.

....by tracing an example client interaction. 2.1. Component Descriptions The protocol layer in NeST provides connectivity to the network and all client interactions are mediated through it. Clients are able to communicate with NeST with any of the supported file transfer protocols, including HTTP [10], a restricted subset of NFS [38] FTP [25] GridFTP [1] and Chirp [34] the native protocol of NeST. The role of the protocol layer is to transform the specific protocol used by the client to and from a common request interface understood by the other components in NeST. We refer to this as a ....

....NeST can leverage existing implementations; for example, to implement GridFTP, we use the server side libraries provided in the Globus Toolkit and we use the Sun RPC package for the RPC communication in NFS. At this point, we have implemented five different file transfer protocols in NeST: HTTP [10], a subset of NFS [32] FTP [25] GridFTP [1] and the NeST native protocol, Chirp [34] In our experience, most request types across protocols are very similar (e.g. all have directory operations such as create, remove, and read, as well as file operations such as read, write, get, put, remove, ....

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, and T. Berners-Lee. RFC-2068.

....progresses. With a dynamic parallel access, the document is divided by the client into B blocks of equal size. In the case of Web access, a block is specified as a range of bytes in a document, e.g. from byte 100 to byte 200. A block requested can be specified using the HTTP1.1 byte range header [16]. The dynamic parallel access scheme proceeds as follows: ffl A client first requests one block from every server. ffl Every time a client has completely received one block from a server, the client requests from this server another block that has not yet been requested from any other server. ....

....also has several costs involved that need to be considered. There is the overhead of doing an extra server access 9 M = 2 servers compared to a four parallel connections to the same server. S = 256 KBytes, B = 20. to find out the document size (this could be done with a HEAD request [16]) Note that for large documents the overhead incurred in obtaining the document size is negligible. Moreover, issuing a first block request with a predetermined fixed size, which would include the document size plus some data, and then using a parallelaccess on further block requests, could ....

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, T. Berners-Lee, et al., "RFC

....has finished. We use the same warm up period in all experiments. Assumptions. In our study all requests except for aborted (i.e. incomplete) transfers are used to drive the simulation. All status 200, 203, 300, 301 and 410 responses (except for dynamic requests) are considered to be cacheable[7]. We also consider status 304 responses to be cacheable even though no data is transferred. We use status 304 responses to update the state information maintained by the proxy cache on the object being validated. We believe that this information helps the replacement policy in determining the ....

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, and T. Berners-Lee, "RFC

....and service provision 3 Technical Framework 3.1 Underlying Technology and Standards 3.1.1 HTTP In creating a protocol for interoperability, it was considered prudent to build upon the existing infrastructure provided by the WWW. Thus, the OAI Metadata Harvesting Protocol is based on HTTP (Fielding et al. 1999), closely following the model upon which HTTP is based, and leveraging its mechanisms for redirection, error handling, and parameter passing. The Metadata Harvesting Protocol is a request response protocol the client makes requests for data and the server returns corresponding responses. 3.1.2 ....

Fielding, R., J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, L. Masinter, P. Leach, and T. Berners-Lee. 1999.

....At present, there are two standard methods for performing this type of authentication: 1) basic HTTP authentication using a login password combination, and (2) client authentication based on public key cryptography. Basic HTTP authentication is described in the HTTP 1.1 protocol specification. [5] When attempting to access restricted resources, the server requests a login password combination from the client, which is encoded (not encrypted) and returned to the server. The server then compares the information presented against a database of registered users. Basic HTTP authentication is ....

....a login password combination from the client, which is encoded (not encrypted) and returned to the server. The server then compares the information presented against a database of registered users. Basic HTTP authentication is insecure since cleartext passwords are transmitted across the network, [5] and in fact may be worse than standard login password methods (depending on how closely HTTP traffic is monitored on the server) It is subject to password sniffing and dictionary attack (repeated login attempts using a known login name with passwords taken from a carefully chosen dictionary) it ....

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, and T. Berners-Lee, RFC 2068, http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2068/rfc2068.

No context found.

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, T. Berners-Lee, et al., "RFC 2068.

No context found.

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, T. Berners-Lee, HTTP/1.1, RFC 2068.

No context found.

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, T. Berners-Lee, HTTP/1.1, RFC

No context found.

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, and T. Berners-Lee. Rfc 2068.

No context found.

R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, T. Berners-Lee, "RFC 2068.

No context found.

RFC 2616 - R. Fielding, UC Irvine, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, L. Masinter, P. Leach, T. Berners-Lee, htt p://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt, June 1999

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC