Network Working Group M. Mealling
Request for Comments: 2483 Network Solutions, Inc.
Category: Experimental R. Daniel, Jr.
Los Alamos National Laboratory
January 1999
Network Working Group M. Mealling
Request for Comments: 2483 Network Solutions, Inc.
Category: Experimental R. Daniel, Jr.
Los Alamos National Laboratory
January 1999
URI Resolution Services Necessary for URN Resolution
URN解析所需的URI解析服务
Status of this Memo
本备忘录的状况
This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
这份备忘录为互联网社区定义了一个实验性协议。它没有规定任何类型的互联网标准。要求进行讨论并提出改进建议。本备忘录的分发不受限制。
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
版权所有（C）互联网协会（1999年）。版权所有。
Abstract
摘要
Retrieving the resource identified by a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) [1] is only one of the operations that can be performed on a URI. One might also ask for and get a list of other identifiers that are aliases for the original URI or a bibliographic description of the resource the URI denotes, for example. This applies to both Uniform Resource Names (URNs) and Uniform Resource Locators (URLs). Uniform Resource Characteristics (URCs) are discussed in this document but only as descriptions of resources rather than identifiers.
检索由统一资源标识符（URI）[1]标识的资源只是可以对URI执行的操作之一。例如，还可以请求并获得其他标识符的列表，这些标识符是原始URI的别名或URI所表示的资源的书目描述。这适用于统一资源名称（URN）和统一资源定位器（URL）。统一资源特征（URC）将在本文档中讨论，但仅作为资源的描述，而不是标识符。
A service in the network providing access to a resource may provide one or some of these options, but it need not provide all of them. This memo specifies an initial set of these operations that can be used to describe the interactions provided by a given access service. It also suggests guidelines that should be adhered to when those operations are encoded in a protocol.
网络中提供对资源访问的服务可以提供这些选项中的一个或一些，但不需要提供所有选项。此备忘录指定了这些操作的初始集合，可用于描述给定访问服务提供的交互。它还建议在协议中对这些操作进行编码时应遵守的准则。
In the course of formulating current proposals [2] regarding URNs [3], it became apparent that requiring servers to manage all of the desired functions or requiring clients to process varied information returned by a server was unrealistic and a barrier to adoption. There needed to be some way for a client to be able to identify a server that specialized in the complex and another that specialized in the
在制定关于URN的当前提案[2]的过程中[3]，很明显，要求服务器管理所有所需功能或要求客户端处理服务器返回的各种信息是不现实的，也是采用的障碍。客户机需要有某种方式来识别一台专门用于复杂环境的服务器和另一台专门用于复杂环境的服务器
simple (but fast). Also, in subsequent conversations it became obvious that, in most cases, some of the operations were inappropriate or difficult for certain identifiers.
简单（但快速）。此外，在随后的对话中，很明显，在大多数情况下，某些操作对于某些标识符来说是不合适或困难的。
The Problem
问题
In the process of learning about a resource in the Internet, there are a variety of possible functions that may be important and/or useful, such as discovery of locators, names, descriptions, and accessing the resource itself. A given service may support only a subset of these; hence, it is important to describe such an access service by the types of functions supported and the resources of which it has some knowledge. For example, in the framework for an RDS described in [5] the RDS itself may provide URLs [6][7], while the resolvers may provide descriptions, URLs, or even the resources themselves. The design of an RDS, as proposed in RFC 2168 [2], may be more generous and provide all of the above.
在学习Internet上的资源的过程中，可能有各种重要和/或有用的功能，例如查找定位器、名称、描述和访问资源本身。给定的服务可能只支持其中的一个子集；因此，通过所支持的功能类型和它所了解的资源来描述这样的访问服务是很重要的。例如，在[5]中描述的RDS框架中，RDS本身可以提供url[6][7]，而解析器可以提供描述、url，甚至资源本身。RFC 2168[2]中提出的RDS设计可能更为慷慨，并提供上述所有功能。
This problem requires some well understood set of identifiers that specify those operations. But an exhaustive set would both be impossible and not very necessary. Thus, this document will list several operations, as well as, lay out requirements for specifying new operations.
这个问题需要一些易于理解的标识符集来指定这些操作。但一套详尽无遗的方案既不可能，也不是很必要。因此，本文件将列出几个操作，以及规定新操作的要求。
The purpose of this document is to define a list of such functions and short names for them and then use them in defining the interface to an access service. Previous versions of this document referred to services where the arguments were specific types of URIs such as URNs or URLs. These services were called "N2L" and "L2L",for example. Their use has been changed in favor of the more general URI form.
本文档的目的是定义此类函数的列表和简短名称，然后使用它们定义访问服务的接口。本文档的早期版本引用了参数为特定类型URI（如URN或URL）的服务。例如，这些服务被称为“N2L”和“L2L”。它们的用法已经改变，取而代之的是更通用的URI形式。
Design Criteria
设计标准
To meet these requirements a fairly simple design criteria was used. The need to identify the operation with some token such that its operands, algorithm, and errors were known proved sufficient to meet these requirements.
为了满足这些要求，使用了相当简单的设计标准。需要使用某种标记来识别操作，以便已知其操作数、算法和错误，从而足以满足这些要求。
To provide a framework both for the specifications in this document and for future work to be written by others, the guidelines below are suggested for documents that seek to specify new operations. Any specification of a member of this set of operations should address these issues with respect to its operands, algorithm, output, and errors.
为了为本文件中的规范和其他人编写的未来工作提供框架，建议以下指南适用于试图指定新操作的文件。这组操作的成员的任何规范都应该解决与操作数、算法、输出和错误有关的这些问题。
Due to the small number of listed functions, a registration mechanism was dismissed as premature. If this list grows, a registration mechanism will probably be needed.
由于所列职能数量较少，登记机制被认为时机尚不成熟。如果该列表增加，则可能需要注册机制。
Also, due to the experimental nature of this document and the systems that use its specifications, the use of words like MUST and SHALL are limited. Where used they reflect a case where this specification could cause harm to existing, non-experimental systems such as HTTP and URNs. Thus, the key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.
此外，由于本文件的实验性质以及使用其规范的系统，必须和应等词语的使用受到限制。在使用时，它们反映了这样一种情况，即此规范可能会对现有的非实验性系统（如HTTP和URNs）造成损害。因此，本文件中的关键词“必须”、“不得”、“必需”、“应”、“不应”、“应”、“不应”、“建议”、“可”和“可选”应按照RFC 2119中所述进行解释。
Operands must contain the following pieces of information:
操作数必须包含以下信息：
* name of the operation * case insensitive mnemonic for the operation * number of operands * type of each operand * format of each operand
* 操作名称*操作的不区分大小写助记符*操作数*每个操作数的类型*每个操作数的格式
The exact algorithm for the operation must either be specified completely or it must be considered opaque and defined by the server or application.
必须完全指定操作的确切算法，或者必须将其视为不透明的，并由服务器或应用程序定义。
Output must specify one of the following:
输出必须指定以下选项之一：
* there is no output * the output is undefined * the output itself and its content * the fact that the output is an object and the object's type and format * any non-protocol specific errors
* 没有输出*输出未定义*输出本身及其内容*输出是对象的事实以及对象的类型和格式*任何非协议特定错误
All errors that are considered applicable across all implementations and application environments must be included. Errors that depend on the system conveying the service are not included. Thus, many of the expected errors such as service availability or operation syntax are not included in this document since they are implementation dependent.
必须包括被认为适用于所有实现和应用程序环境的所有错误。不包括依赖于传输服务的系统的错误。因此，许多预期错误（如服务可用性或操作语法）不包含在本文档中，因为它们依赖于实现。
Any security considerations relating to the service provided must be specified. This does NOT include considerations dealing with the protocol used to convey the service or to those that normally accompany the results of the service. For example, a service that returned a single URL would need to discuss the situation where someone maliciously inserts an incorrect URL into the resolver but NOT the case where someone sends personal information across the Internet to the resource identified by the correct URL.
必须指定与所提供服务相关的任何安全注意事项。这不包括处理用于传输服务的协议或通常伴随服务结果的协议的注意事项。例如，返回单个URL的服务需要讨论有人恶意将错误URL插入解析程序的情况，而不是有人通过Internet将个人信息发送到正确URL标识的资源的情况。
To be useful, these operations have to be used within some system or protocol. In many cases, these systems and protocols will place restrictions on which operations make sense and how those that do are syntactically represented. It is sufficient for those protocols to define new operations within their own protocol specification documents but care should be taken to make this fact well known.
为了有用，这些操作必须在某些系统或协议中使用。在许多情况下，这些系统和协议将限制哪些操作是有意义的，以及这些操作如何在语法上表示。这些协议在其自己的协议规范文档中定义新操作就足够了，但应注意使这一事实广为人知。
Also, a given system or protocol will have its own output specifications that may restrict the output formats of a given operation. Additionally, a given protocol may have better solution for output than the ones given here. For example, the result of an operation that converts a URI to more than one URL may be encoded in a protocol-specific manner that conveys information about the closeness of each resource on the network.
此外，给定的系统或协议将有自己的输出规范，这些规范可能会限制给定操作的输出格式。此外，给定的协议可能比这里给出的协议具有更好的输出解决方案。例如，将URI转换为多个URL的操作的结果可以以特定于协议的方式编码，该方式传递关于网络上每个资源的接近度的信息。
Thus, the requirements on encoding these operations within a given system are as follows:
因此，在给定系统内对这些操作进行编码的要求如下：
* which subset of the operations are allowed * how the operator is encoded * how the operands are encoded * how the error codes are returned
* 允许哪些操作子集*运算符如何编码*操作数如何编码*错误代码如何返回
The text/uri-list MIME Media Type is specified in Section 5. This Media Type is merely a suggestion for experimental systems that need a simple implementation. It is included here merely as an example to show completeness (however simple it may be).
文本/uri列表MIME媒体类型在第5节中指定。这种媒体类型只是对需要简单实现的实验系统的建议。这里仅作为一个示例来说明完整性（无论多么简单）。
* Name: URI to URL * Mnemonic: I2L * Number of Operands: 1 * Type of Each Operand: First operand is a URI. * Format of Each Operand: First operand is encoded as a URI. * Algorithm: Opaque * Output: One and only one URL * Errors Conditions: o Malformed URI o URI is syntactically valid but does not exist in any form. o URI exists but there is no available output from this operation. o URI existed in the past but nothing is currently known about it. o Access denied
* 名称：URI到URL*助记符：I2L*操作数：1*每个操作数的类型：第一个操作数是URI。*每个操作数的格式：第一个操作数编码为URI。*算法：不透明*输出：一个且只有一个URL*错误条件：o格式错误的URI o URI在语法上有效，但不以任何形式存在。o URI存在，但此操作没有可用的输出。o URI在过去存在，但目前对此一无所知。o访问被拒绝
* Security Considerations: o Malicious Redirection One of the fundamental dangers related to any service such as this is that a malicious entry in a resolver's database will cause clients to resolve the URI into the wrong URL. The possible intent may be to cause the client to retrieve a resource containing fraudulent or damaging material. o Denial of Service By removing the URL to which the URI maps, a malicious intruder may remove the client's ability to retrieve the resource.
* 安全注意事项：恶意重定向与任何服务相关的一个基本危险是，解析程序数据库中的恶意条目将导致客户端将URI解析为错误的URL。可能的意图可能是导致客户检索包含欺诈性或破坏性材料的资源。o拒绝服务通过删除URI映射到的URL，恶意入侵者可能会删除客户端检索资源的能力。
This operation is used to map a single URI to a single URL. It is used by lightweight clients that do not have the ability to select from a list of URLs or understand a URC. The algorithm for this mapping is dependent on the URI scheme.
此操作用于将单个URI映射到单个URL。它由轻量级客户端使用，这些客户端无法从URL列表中进行选择或理解URC。此映射的算法取决于URI方案。
* Name: URI to URLs * Mnemonic: I2LS * Number of Operands: 1 * Type of Each Operand: First operand is a URI. * Format of Each Operand: First operand is encoded as a URI. * Algorithm: Opaque * Output: A list of zero or more URLs * Errors: o Malformed URI
* 名称：URL的URI*助记符：I2LS*操作数：1*每个操作数的类型：第一个操作数是URI。*每个操作数的格式：第一个操作数编码为URI。*算法：不透明*输出：零个或多个URL的列表*错误：o格式错误的URI
o URI is syntactically valid but does not exist in any form.
o URI exists but there is no available output from this
operation.
o URI existed in the past but nothing is currently known
about it.
o Access denied
* Security Considerations:
o Malicious Redirection (see I2L)
o Denial of Service (see I2L)
o URI is syntactically valid but does not exist in any form.
o URI exists but there is no available output from this
operation.
o URI existed in the past but nothing is currently known
about it.
o Access denied
* Security Considerations:
o Malicious Redirection (see I2L)
o Denial of Service (see I2L)
This operation is used to map a single URI to 0 or more URLs. It is used by a client that can pick from a list of URLs based on some criteria that are important to the client. The client should not make any assumptions about the order of the URLs returned. No matter what the particular media type, the result should be a list of the URLs that may be used to obtain an instance of the resource identified by the URI. All URIs shall be encoded according to the URL [7] and URN [3] specifications.
此操作用于将单个URI映射到0个或多个URL。它由客户机使用，客户机可以根据一些对客户机很重要的标准从URL列表中进行选择。客户端不应该对返回的URL的顺序做出任何假设。无论特定的媒体类型是什么，结果都应该是一个URL列表，这些URL可用于获取URI标识的资源实例。所有URI应根据URL[7]和URN[3]规范进行编码。
* Name: URI to Resource * Mnemonic: I2R * Number of Operands: 1 * Type of Each Operand: First operand is a URI. * Format of Each Operand: First operand is encoded as a URI. * Algorithm: Opaque * Output: An instance of the resource named by the URI. * Errors: o Malformed URI o URI is syntactically valid but does not exist in any form. o URI exists but there is no available output from this operation. o URI existed in the past but nothing is currently known about it. o Access denied * Security Considerations: o Malicious Redirection (see I2L) o Denial of Service (see I2L)
* 名称：URI到资源*助记符：I2R*操作数：1*每个操作数的类型：第一个操作数是URI。*每个操作数的格式：第一个操作数编码为URI。*算法：不透明*输出：由URI命名的资源的实例。*错误：o格式错误的URI o URI在语法上有效，但不以任何形式存在。o URI存在，但此操作没有可用的输出。o URI在过去存在，但目前对此一无所知。o拒绝访问*安全注意事项：o恶意重定向（请参阅I2L）o拒绝服务（请参阅I2L）
This operation is used to return a single instance of the resource that is named by the URI. The format of the output is dependent on the resource itself.
此操作用于返回由URI命名的资源的单个实例。输出的格式取决于资源本身。
* Name: URI to Resources * Mnemonic: I2Rs * Number of Operands: 1 * Type of Each Operand: First operand is a URI. * Format of Each Operand: First operand is encoded as a URI. * Algorithm: Opaque * Output: Zero or more instances of the resource named by the URI. * Errors: o Malformed URI o URI is syntactically valid but does not exist in any form. o URI exists but there is no available output from this operation. o URI existed in the past but nothing is currently known about it. o Access denied * Security Considerations: o Malicious Redirection (see I2L) o Denial of Service (see I2L)
* 名称：资源的URI*助记符：I2Rs*操作数：1*每个操作数的类型：第一个操作数是URI。*每个操作数的格式：第一个操作数编码为URI。*算法：不透明*输出：URI命名的资源的零个或多个实例。*错误：o格式错误的URI o URI在语法上有效，但不以任何形式存在。o URI存在，但此操作没有可用的输出。o URI在过去存在，但目前对此一无所知。o拒绝访问*安全注意事项：o恶意重定向（请参阅I2L）o拒绝服务（请参阅I2L）
This operation is used to return multiple instances of a resource, for example, GIF and JPEG versions of an image. The judgment about the resources being "the same" resides with the naming authority that issued the URI.
此操作用于返回资源的多个实例，例如图像的GIF和JPEG版本。关于资源是否“相同”的判断取决于发布URI的命名机构。
The output shall be a MIME multipart/alternative [4] message with the alternative versions of the resource in separate body parts. If there is only one version of the resource identified by the URN, it MAY be returned without the multipart/alternative wrapper.
输出应为MIME多部分/备选[4]消息，资源的备选版本在单独的正文部分。如果URN标识的资源只有一个版本，则可以在不使用多部分/替代包装的情况下返回该资源。
* Name: URI to URC * Mnemonic: I2C * Number of Operands: 1 * Type of Each Operand: First operand is a URI. * Format of Each Operand: First operand is encoded as a URI. * Algorithm: Opaque * Output: A URC * Errors: o Malformed URI o URI is syntactically valid but does not exist in any form. o URI exists but there is no available output from this operation. o URI existed in the past but nothing is currently known about it. o Access denied * Security Considerations: o Malicious Redirection (see I2L) o Denial of Service (see I2L)
* 名称：URI到URC*助记符：I2C*操作数：1*每个操作数的类型：第一个操作数是URI。*每个操作数的格式：第一个操作数编码为URI。*算法：不透明*输出：URC*错误：o格式错误的URI o URI在语法上有效，但不以任何形式存在。o URI存在，但此操作没有可用的输出。o URI在过去存在，但目前对此一无所知。o拒绝访问*安全注意事项：o恶意重定向（请参阅I2L）o拒绝服务（请参阅I2L）
Uniform Resource Characteristics are descriptions of resources. This request allows the client to obtain a description of the resource identified by a URI, as opposed to the resource itself or simply the resource's URLs. The description might be a bibliographic citation, a digital signature, or a revision history. This memo does not specify the content of any response to a URC request. That content is expected to vary from one server to another.
统一资源特征是对资源的描述。此请求允许客户端获取由URI标识的资源的描述，而不是资源本身或资源的URL。描述可能是书目引用、数字签名或修订历史。本备忘录未指定对URC请求的任何响应的内容。这些内容在不同的服务器上会有所不同。
* Name: URI to URCs * Mnemonic: I2CS * Number of Operands: 1 * Type of Each Operand: First operand is a URI. * Format of Each Operand: First operand is encoded as a URI. * Algorithm: Opaque * Output: Zero or more URCs * Errors: o Malformed URI o URI is syntactically valid but does not exist in any form. o URI exists but there is no available output from this operation. o URI existed in the past but nothing is currently known about it. o Access denied * Security Considerations: o Malicious Redirection (see I2L) o Denial of Service (see I2L)
* 名称：URCs的URI*助记符：I2CS*操作数：1*每个操作数的类型：第一个操作数是URI。*每个操作数的格式：第一个操作数编码为URI。*算法：不透明*输出：零个或多个URC*错误：o格式错误的URI o URI在语法上有效，但不以任何形式存在。o URI存在，但此操作没有可用的输出。o URI在过去存在，但目前对此一无所知。o拒绝访问*安全注意事项：o恶意重定向（请参阅I2L）o拒绝服务（请参阅I2L）
URCs can come in different formats and types. This operation returns zero or more URCs that are appropriate for the given URI.
URC可以有不同的格式和类型。此操作返回适用于给定URI的零个或多个URC。
* Name: URI to URN * Mnemonic: I2N * Number of Operands: 1 * Type of Each Operand: First operand is a URN. * Format of Each Operand: First operand is encoded as a URI. * Algorithm: Opaque * Output: One and only one URN * Errors: o Malformed URI o URI is syntactically valid but does not exist in any form. o URI exists but there is no available output from this operation. o URI existed in the past but nothing is currently known about it.
* 名称：URI到URN*助记符：I2N*操作数：1*每个操作数的类型：第一个操作数是URN。*每个操作数的格式：第一个操作数编码为URI。*算法：不透明*输出：一个且只有一个URN*错误：o格式错误的URI o URI在语法上有效，但不以任何形式存在。o URI存在，但此操作没有可用的输出。o URI在过去存在，但目前对此一无所知。
o Access denied * Security Considerations: o Malicious Redirection (see I2L) o Denial of Service (see I2L)
o拒绝访问*安全注意事项：o恶意重定向（请参阅I2L）o拒绝服务（请参阅I2L）
While URNs are supposed to identify one and only one resource, that does not mean that a resource may have one and only one URN. For example, consider a resource that one organization wishes to name 'foo'; another organization, in agreement with the first, wants to call the resource 'bar'. Both organizations can agree that both names 'name' the same resource and that the URNs 'foo' and 'bar' are equivalent.
虽然URN应该标识一个且只有一个资源，但这并不意味着一个资源可能有一个且只有一个URN。例如，考虑一个组织希望命名为“FO”的资源；另一个组织与第一个组织达成一致，希望将资源称为“酒吧”。两个组织都同意两个名称“name”是相同的资源，并且URN“foo”和“bar”是等效的。
The result is a URN, known to the server, that identifies the same resource as the input URN.
结果是服务器已知的URN，它标识与输入URN相同的资源。
Extreme care should be taken with this service as it toys with the idea of equality with respect to URNs. As mentioned in several URN documents, the idea of equality is very domain specific. For example, a URN pointing to a weather map for a particular day and a URN pointing to the map as it changes from day to day would NOT be returned in this example because they point to do different resources. Some other concept of temporary equivalence is at work. This service instead deals with resources that have two different names where there is a binding between the names that is agreed by both name assigners. I.e., both namespaces MUST have agreed that the each name can be used in place of the other and the meaning does not change.
这项服务应特别小心，因为它在骨灰盒方面体现了平等的理念。正如几个URN文档中提到的，相等的概念是非常特定于领域的。例如，在本例中，指向特定日期的天气图的URN和指向每天变化的地图的URN不会返回，因为它们指向不同的资源。暂时对等的其他一些概念正在发挥作用。相反，此服务处理具有两个不同名称的资源，其中名称之间存在由两个名称赋值器同意的绑定。也就是说，两个名称空间必须一致同意，每个名称都可以用来代替另一个，并且其含义不会改变。
* Name: URI to URNs * Mnemonic: I2NS * Number of Operands: 1 * Type of Each Operand: First operand is a URI. * Format of Each Operand: First operand is encoded as a URI. * Algorithm: Opaque * Output: A list of URNs * Errors: o Malformed URI o URI is syntactically valid but does not exist in any form. o URI exists but there is no available output from this operation. o URI existed in the past but nothing is currently known about it. o Access denied * Security Considerations: o Malicious Redirection (see I2L)
* 名称：URI到URNs*助记符：I2NS*操作数：1*每个操作数的类型：第一个操作数是URI。*每个操作数的格式：第一个操作数编码为URI。*算法：不透明*输出：URN*错误列表：o格式错误的URI o URI在语法上有效，但不以任何形式存在。o URI存在，但此操作没有可用的输出。o URI在过去存在，但目前对此一无所知。o拒绝访问*安全注意事项：o恶意重定向（请参阅I2L）
o Denial of Service (see I2L)
o 拒绝服务（见I2L）
This operation simply returns zero or more URNs following the same criteria and cautions as the I2N operation.
此操作仅返回零个或多个URN，遵循与I2N操作相同的标准和注意事项。
4.9 I=I (Is URI equal to URI):
4.9 I=I（URI等于URI）：
* Name: URI = URI * Mnemonic: I=I * Number of Operands: 2 * Type of Each Operand: Both operands are URIs. * Format of Each Operand: Both operands are encoded as a URIs. * Algorithm: Opaque * Output: TRUE or FALSE * Errors: o Malformed URIs o URIs are syntactically valid but do not exist in any form. o URIs exist but there is no available output from this operation. o URIs existed in the past but nothing is currently known about them. o Access denied * Security Considerations: o Malicious Redirection (see I2L) o Denial of Service (see I2L)
* 名称：URI=URI*助记符：I=I*操作数：2*每个操作数的类型：两个操作数都是URI。*每个操作数的格式：两个操作数都编码为URI。*算法：不透明*输出：TRUE或FALSE*错误：o格式错误的URI o URI在语法上有效，但不以任何形式存在。o URI存在，但此操作没有可用的输出。o URI在过去存在，但目前对其一无所知。o拒绝访问*安全注意事项：o恶意重定向（请参阅I2L）o拒绝服务（请参阅I2L）
This operation is used to determine whether two given URIs are considered to be equal by the server being asked the question. The algorithm used to determine equality is opaque. No assertions are made about whether or not the URIs exhibits characteristics of URNs or URLs.
此操作用于确定被询问问题的服务器是否认为两个给定URI相等。用于确定相等性的算法是不透明的。对于URI是否显示URN或URL的特征，不做任何断言。
Several of the resolution service requests, such as I2Ls, I2Ns, result in a list of URIs being returned to the client. The text/uri-list Internet Media Type is defined to provide a simple format for the automatic processing of such lists of URIs.
一些解析服务请求（如I2Ls、I2Ns）会导致将URI列表返回给客户端。定义text/uri列表Internet媒体类型是为了为自动处理此类uri列表提供一种简单的格式。
This is a copy of the IANA registration of the text/uri-list Media Type.
这是文本/uri列表媒体类型的IANA注册副本。
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 97 08:36:07 PDT
From: Ron Daniel Jr. <rdaniel@lanl.gov>
To: iana@iana.org, rdaniel@lanl.gov
Subject: Request for MIME media type Text/IETF Tree - uri-list
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 97 08:36:07 PDT
From: Ron Daniel Jr. <rdaniel@lanl.gov>
To: iana@iana.org, rdaniel@lanl.gov
Subject: Request for MIME media type Text/IETF Tree - uri-list
Name : Ron Daniel Jr.
姓名：小罗恩·丹尼尔。
E-mail : rdaniel@lanl.gov
电邮：rdaniel@lanl.gov
MIME media type name : Text
MIME媒体类型名称：Text
MIME subtype name : IETF Tree -uri-list
MIME子类型名称：IETF树-uri列表
Required parameters : none
所需参数：无
Optional parameters : charset
可选参数：字符集
Currently, URIs can be represented using US-ASCII. However, there are many non-standard URIs which use special character sets. Discussion of how to best achieve internationalization of URIs is underway. This registration will be updated with a discussion of the URI charsets once that discussion has concluded.
目前，URI可以使用US-ASCII表示。然而，有许多使用特殊字符集的非标准URI。关于如何最好地实现URI国际化的讨论正在进行中。一旦讨论结束，将通过对URI字符集的讨论来更新此注册。
Encoding considerations : Some transfer protocols, such as SMTP, place limits on the length of lines. Very long URIs might exceed those limits. Systems must therefore be prepared to use a suitable content transfer encoding. This is anticipated to be a rare occurance.
编码注意事项：某些传输协议（如SMTP）对行的长度进行了限制。很长的URI可能会超过这些限制。因此，系统必须准备好使用合适的内容传输编码。预计这将是一种罕见的情况。
Security considerations : Client software should be aware of the security considerations of URIs. For example, accessing some URIs can result in sending a death threat to a head of state, frequently prompting a visit from the relevant protective service. Accessing other URIs may result in financial obligations, or access to resources considered inappropriate by one's employer.
安全注意事项：客户端软件应了解URI的安全注意事项。例如，访问某些URI可能会导致向国家元首发送死亡威胁，并经常提示相关保护机构进行访问。访问其他URI可能导致财务义务，或访问雇主认为不适当的资源。
While the legitimate provider of a uri-list could exploit these properties for good or ill, it is more likely that uri-lists will be falsified in order to exploit such characteristics of URIs.
虽然uri列表的合法提供者可以利用这些属性进行有益或有害的攻击，但更有可能的是，为了利用uri的这些特征，uri列表将被篡改。
Additionally, the lookup and reverse lookup potential of the uri-list may be attractive to traffic analysts. URI lists may also reveal confidential information, such as the location of sensitive information.
此外，uri列表的查找和反向查找潜力可能对流量分析人员具有吸引力。URI列表还可能泄露机密信息，例如敏感信息的位置。
Because of these considerations, external confidentiality measures should be available to protect uri-list responses when appropriate.
出于这些考虑，在适当的时候，应该提供外部保密措施来保护uri列表响应。
Interoperability considerations : none known
互操作性注意事项：未知
Published specification : Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) and Uniform Resource Names (URNs) are two instances of the more general class of identifiers known as Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs). URN resolution methods frequently wish to return lists of URLs for a resource so that fault-tolerance and load balancing can be achieved. The text/uri-list format is intended to be a very simple format for communicating such lists of URLs (and URNs) in a form suitable for automatic processing.
发布的规范：统一资源定位器（URL）和统一资源名称（URN）是称为统一资源标识符（URI）的更通用标识符类的两个实例。URN解析方法通常希望返回资源的URL列表，以便实现容错和负载平衡。text/uri列表格式是一种非常简单的格式，用于以适合自动处理的形式传递此类url（和urn）列表。
The format of text/uri-list resources is:
文本/uri列表资源的格式为：
1) Any lines beginning with the '#' character are comment lines and are ignored during processing. (Note that URIs may contain the '#' character, so it is only a comment character when it is the first character on a line.)
1) 任何以“#”字符开头的行都是注释行，在处理过程中会被忽略。（请注意，URI可能包含“#”字符，因此当它是行中的第一个字符时，它只是注释字符。）
2) The remaining non-comment lines shall be URIs (URNs or URLs), encoded according to the URL or URN specifications (RFC2141, RFC1738 and RFC2396). Each URI shall appear on one and only one line. Very long URIs are not broken in the text/uri-list format. Content-transfer-encodings may be used to enforce line length limitations.
2) 其余非注释行应为URI（URN或URL），根据URL或URN规范（RFC2141、RFC1738和RFC2396）进行编码。每个URI应仅出现在一行上。很长的uri不会以text/uri列表格式断开。内容传输编码可用于强制执行行长度限制。
3) As for all text/* formats, lines are terminated with a CRLF pair.
3) As for all text/* formats, lines are terminated with a CRLF pair.
In applications where one URI has been mapped to a list of URIs, the first line of the text/uri-list response SHOULD be a comment giving the original URI.
在一个URI映射到URI列表的应用程序中，text/URI列表响应的第一行应该是给出原始URI的注释。
An example of the format is given below:
该格式的示例如下所示：
# urn:isbn:0-201-08372-8
http://www.huh.org/books/foo.html
http://www.huh.org/books/foo.pdf
ftp://ftp.foo.org/books/foo.txt
# urn:isbn:0-201-08372-8
http://www.huh.org/books/foo.html
http://www.huh.org/books/foo.pdf
ftp://ftp.foo.org/books/foo.txt
Applications which use this media : URN resolvers are the initial applications. Web clients and proxies are applications that are likely to support this format in the future.
使用此介质的应用程序：URN解析器是初始应用程序。Web客户端和代理是将来可能支持这种格式的应用程序。
Additional information :
其他信息：
1. Magic number(s) : none at this time 2. File extension(s) : .uris or .uri recommended 3. Macintosh file type code : URIs recommended
1. 幻数：目前无2。文件扩展名：.uris或.uri建议为3。Macintosh文件类型代码：建议使用URI
This media type is the product of the URN working group of the IETF.
这种媒体类型是IETF URN工作组的产品。
Person to contact for further information :
欲了解更多信息，请联系：
1. Name : Ron Daniel Jr. 2. E-mail : rdaniel@lanl.gov
1. 姓名：小罗恩·丹尼尔2。电邮：rdaniel@lanl.gov
Intended usage : Limited Use The text/uri-list media type is intended for use in applications which utilize URIs for replicated resources.
预期用途：限制使用text/uri列表媒体类型旨在用于将uri用于复制资源的应用程序中。
Author/Change controller : Ron Daniel Jr. Los Alamos National Laboratory rdaniel@lanl.gov
作者/变更控制员：罗恩·丹尼尔·洛斯阿拉莫斯国家实验室rdaniel@lanl.gov
In applications where one URI has been mapped to a list of URIs, such as in response to the I2Ls request, the first line of the text/uri-list response SHOULD be a comment giving the original URI. An example of such a result for the I2L request is shown below in Figure 1.
在一个URI映射到URI列表的应用程序中，例如响应I2Ls请求时，text/URI列表响应的第一行应该是给出原始URI的注释。I2L请求的结果示例如下图1所示。
Communications with a server may be of a sensitive nature. Some servers will hold information that should only be released to authorized users. The results from servers may be the target of spoofing, especially once electronic commerce transactions are common and there is money to be made by directing users to pirate repositories rather than repositories that pay royalties to rights-holders. Server requests may be of interest to traffic analysts. The requests may also be subject to spoofing.
与服务器的通信可能是敏感的。某些服务器将保存只应发布给授权用户的信息。来自服务器的结果可能成为欺骗的目标，特别是在电子商务交易很普遍，并且通过将用户引导到盗版存储库而不是向版权持有人支付版税的存储库来赚钱的情况下。流量分析师可能对服务器请求感兴趣。这些请求也可能受到欺骗。
The "Access denied" error message assumes a system within which the operation is being performed that can convey an authenticated concept of access control. Thus, the "Access denied" message should only be returned by systems that have an appropriate method of determining access control.
“拒绝访问”错误消息假定正在执行操作的系统可以传递经过身份验证的访问控制概念。因此，“拒绝访问”消息只能由具有确定访问控制的适当方法的系统返回。
[1] Berners-Lee, T., "Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW: A Unifying Syntax for the Expression of Names and Addresses of Objects on the Network as Used in the World-Wide Web", RFC 1630, June 1994.
[1] Berners Lee，T.，“万维网中的通用资源标识符：万维网中使用的网络对象名称和地址表达的统一语法”，RFC 1630，1994年6月。
[2] Daniel, R., and Mealling, M., "Resolution of Uniform Resource Identifiers using the Domain Name System", RFC 2168, February 1997.
[2] Daniel，R.和Mealling，M.，“使用域名系统解析统一资源标识符”，RFC 2168，1997年2月。
[3] Moats, R., "URN Syntax", RFC 2141, January 1997.
[3] 护城河，R.，“瓮语法”，RFC 21411997年1月。
[4] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies", RFC 2045, November 1996.
[4] Freed，N.和N.Borenstein，“多用途互联网邮件扩展（MIME）第一部分：互联网邮件正文格式”，RFC 20451996年11月。
[5] Sollins, K., "Architectural Principles of Uniform Resource Name Resolution", RFC 2276, January 1998.
[5] Sollins，K.，“统一资源名称解析的体系结构原则”，RFC 2276，1998年1月。
[6] Kunze, J., "Functional Recommendations for Internet Resource Locators", RFC 1736, February 1995.
[6] Kunze，J.，“因特网资源定位器的功能建议”，RFC 1736，1995年2月。
[7] Berners-Lee, T., Masinter, L. and M. McCahill, "Uniform Resource Locators (URL)", RFC 1738, December 1994.
[7] Berners Lee，T.，Masinter，L.和M.McCahill，“统一资源定位器（URL）”，RFC 17381994年12月。
Michael Mealling Network Solutions 505 Huntmar Park Drive Herndon, VA 22070
迈克尔·米林网络解决方案，弗吉尼亚州赫恩登市亨特马公园大道505号，邮编22070
Phone: (703) 742-0400 Fax: (703) 742-9552 EMail: michaelm@rwhois.net
电话：（703）742-0400传真：（703）742-9552电子邮件：michaelm@rwhois.net
Ron Daniel Advanced Computing Lab, MS B287 Los Alamos National Laboratory Los Alamos, NM, USA, 87545
罗恩·丹尼尔高级计算实验室，MS B287洛斯阿拉莫斯国家实验室，美国新墨西哥州洛斯阿拉莫斯，87545
Phone: (505) 665-0597 Fax: (505) 665-4939 EMail: rdaniel@lanl.gov
电话：（505）665-0597传真：（505）665-4939电子邮件：rdaniel@lanl.gov
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
版权所有（C）互联网协会（1999年）。版权所有。
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English.
本文件及其译本可复制并提供给他人，对其进行评论或解释或协助其实施的衍生作品可全部或部分编制、复制、出版和分发，不受任何限制，前提是上述版权声明和本段包含在所有此类副本和衍生作品中。但是，不得以任何方式修改本文件本身，例如删除版权通知或对互联网协会或其他互联网组织的引用，除非出于制定互联网标准的需要，在这种情况下，必须遵循互联网标准过程中定义的版权程序，或根据需要将其翻译成英语以外的其他语言。
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
上述授予的有限许可是永久性的，互联网协会或其继承人或受让人不会撤销。
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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.
本文件和其中包含的信息是按“原样”提供的，互联网协会和互联网工程任务组否认所有明示或暗示的保证，包括但不限于任何保证，即使用本文中的信息不会侵犯任何权利，或对适销性或特定用途适用性的任何默示保证。