diff options
author | Erlang/OTP <[email protected]> | 2009-11-20 14:54:40 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Erlang/OTP <[email protected]> | 2009-11-20 14:54:40 +0000 |
commit | 84adefa331c4159d432d22840663c38f155cd4c1 (patch) | |
tree | bff9a9c66adda4df2106dfd0e5c053ab182a12bd /lib/megaco/doc/standard/rfc4234.txt | |
download | otp-84adefa331c4159d432d22840663c38f155cd4c1.tar.gz otp-84adefa331c4159d432d22840663c38f155cd4c1.tar.bz2 otp-84adefa331c4159d432d22840663c38f155cd4c1.zip |
The R13B03 release.OTP_R13B03
Diffstat (limited to 'lib/megaco/doc/standard/rfc4234.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | lib/megaco/doc/standard/rfc4234.txt | 899 |
1 files changed, 899 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/lib/megaco/doc/standard/rfc4234.txt b/lib/megaco/doc/standard/rfc4234.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..74d4c44f43 --- /dev/null +++ b/lib/megaco/doc/standard/rfc4234.txt @@ -0,0 +1,899 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group D. Crocker, Ed. +Request for Comments: 4234 Brandenburg InternetWorking +Obsoletes: 2234 P. Overell +Category: Standards Track THUS plc. + October 2005 + + + Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF + +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 (2005). + +Abstract + + Internet technical specifications often need to define a formal + syntax. Over the years, a modified version of Backus-Naur Form + (BNF), called Augmented BNF (ABNF), has been popular among many + Internet specifications. The current specification documents ABNF. + It balances compactness and simplicity, with reasonable + representational power. The differences between standard BNF and + ABNF involve naming rules, repetition, alternatives, order- + independence, and value ranges. This specification also supplies + additional rule definitions and encoding for a core lexical analyzer + of the type common to several Internet specifications. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 1] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + +Table of Contents + + 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................2 + 2. RULE DEFINITION .................................................3 + 2.1. Rule Naming ................................................3 + 2.2. Rule Form ..................................................3 + 2.3. Terminal Values ............................................4 + 2.4. External Encodings .........................................5 + 3. OPERATORS .......................................................6 + 3.1. Concatenation: Rule1 Rule2 ................................6 + 3.2. Alternatives: Rule1 / Rule2 ...............................6 + 3.3. Incremental Alternatives: Rule1 =/ Rule2 ...................7 + 3.4. Value Range Alternatives: %c##-## .........................7 + 3.5. Sequence Group: (Rule1 Rule2) .............................8 + 3.6. Variable Repetition: *Rule ................................8 + 3.7. Specific Repetition: nRule ................................9 + 3.8. Optional Sequence: [RULE] .................................9 + 3.9. Comment: ; Comment ........................................9 + 3.10. Operator Precedence .......................................9 + 4. ABNF DEFINITION OF ABNF ........................................10 + 5. SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS ........................................11 + 6. References .....................................................11 + 6.1. Normative References ......................................11 + 6.2. Informative References ....................................11 + Appendix A. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .....................................13 + Appendix B. APPENDIX - CORE ABNF OF ABNF .........................13 + B.1. Core Rules ...............................................13 + B.2. Common Encoding ..........................................14 + +1. INTRODUCTION + + Internet technical specifications often need to define a formal + syntax and are free to employ whatever notation their authors deem + useful. Over the years, a modified version of Backus-Naur Form + (BNF), called Augmented BNF (ABNF), has been popular among many + Internet specifications. It balances compactness and simplicity, + with reasonable representational power. In the early days of the + Arpanet, each specification contained its own definition of ABNF. + This included the email specifications, [RFC733] and then [RFC822], + which came to be the common citations for defining ABNF. The current + document separates those definitions to permit selective reference. + Predictably, it also provides some modifications and enhancements. + + The differences between standard BNF and ABNF involve naming rules, + repetition, alternatives, order-independence, and value ranges. + Appendix B supplies rule definitions and encoding for a core lexical + analyzer of the type common to several Internet specifications. It + is provided as a convenience and is otherwise separate from the meta + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 2] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + + language defined in the body of this document, and separate from its + formal status. + + Changes since [RFC2234]: + + In Section 3.7, the phrase: "That is, exactly <N> occurrences of + <element>." was corrected to: "That is, exactly <n> occurrences of + <element>." + + Some continuation comment lines needed to be corrected to begin + with comment character (";"). + +2. RULE DEFINITION + +2.1. Rule Naming + + The name of a rule is simply the name itself; that is, a sequence of + characters, beginning with an alphabetic character, and followed by a + combination of alphabetics, digits, and hyphens (dashes). + + NOTE: + + Rule names are case-insensitive + + The names <rulename>, <Rulename>, <RULENAME>, and <rUlENamE> all + refer to the same rule. + + Unlike original BNF, angle brackets ("<", ">") are not required. + However, angle brackets may be used around a rule name whenever their + presence facilitates in discerning the use of a rule name. This is + typically restricted to rule name references in free-form prose, or + to distinguish partial rules that combine into a string not separated + by white space, such as shown in the discussion about repetition, + below. + +2.2. Rule Form + + A rule is defined by the following sequence: + + name = elements crlf + + where <name> is the name of the rule, <elements> is one or more rule + names or terminal specifications, and <crlf> is the end-of-line + indicator (carriage return followed by line feed). The equal sign + separates the name from the definition of the rule. The elements + form a sequence of one or more rule names and/or value definitions, + combined according to the various operators defined in this document, + such as alternative and repetition. + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 3] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + + For visual ease, rule definitions are left aligned. When a rule + requires multiple lines, the continuation lines are indented. The + left alignment and indentation are relative to the first lines of the + ABNF rules and need not match the left margin of the document. + +2.3. Terminal Values + + Rules resolve into a string of terminal values, sometimes called + characters. In ABNF, a character is merely a non-negative integer. + In certain contexts, a specific mapping (encoding) of values into a + character set (such as ASCII) will be specified. + + Terminals are specified by one or more numeric characters, with the + base interpretation of those characters indicated explicitly. The + following bases are currently defined: + + b = binary + + d = decimal + + x = hexadecimal + + Hence: + + CR = %d13 + + CR = %x0D + + respectively specify the decimal and hexadecimal representation of + [US-ASCII] for carriage return. + + A concatenated string of such values is specified compactly, using a + period (".") to indicate a separation of characters within that + value. Hence: + + CRLF = %d13.10 + + ABNF permits the specification of literal text strings directly, + enclosed in quotation-marks. Hence: + + command = "command string" + + Literal text strings are interpreted as a concatenated set of + printable characters. + + + + + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 4] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + + NOTE: + + ABNF strings are case-insensitive and the character set for these + strings is us-ascii. + + Hence: + + rulename = "abc" + + and: + + rulename = "aBc" + + will match "abc", "Abc", "aBc", "abC", "ABc", "aBC", "AbC", and + "ABC". + + To specify a rule that IS case SENSITIVE, specify the characters + individually. + + For example: + + rulename = %d97 %d98 %d99 + + or + + rulename = %d97.98.99 + + will match only the string that comprises only the lowercased + characters, abc. + +2.4. External Encodings + + External representations of terminal value characters will vary + according to constraints in the storage or transmission environment. + Hence, the same ABNF-based grammar may have multiple external + encodings, such as one for a 7-bit US-ASCII environment, another for + a binary octet environment, and still a different one when 16-bit + Unicode is used. Encoding details are beyond the scope of ABNF, + although Appendix A (Core) provides definitions for a 7-bit US-ASCII + environment as has been common to much of the Internet. + + By separating external encoding from the syntax, it is intended that + alternate encoding environments can be used for the same syntax. + + + + + + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 5] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + +3. OPERATORS + +3.1. Concatenation: Rule1 Rule2 + + A rule can define a simple, ordered string of values (i.e., a + concatenation of contiguous characters) by listing a sequence of rule + names. For example: + + foo = %x61 ; a + + bar = %x62 ; b + + mumble = foo bar foo + + So that the rule <mumble> matches the lowercase string "aba". + + LINEAR WHITE SPACE: Concatenation is at the core of the ABNF parsing + model. A string of contiguous characters (values) is parsed + according to the rules defined in ABNF. For Internet specifications, + there is some history of permitting linear white space (space and + horizontal tab) to be freely and implicitly interspersed around major + constructs, such as delimiting special characters or atomic strings. + + NOTE: + + This specification for ABNF does not provide for implicit + specification of linear white space. + + Any grammar that wishes to permit linear white space around + delimiters or string segments must specify it explicitly. It is + often useful to provide for such white space in "core" rules that are + then used variously among higher-level rules. The "core" rules might + be formed into a lexical analyzer or simply be part of the main + ruleset. + +3.2. Alternatives: Rule1 / Rule2 + + Elements separated by a forward slash ("/") are alternatives. + Therefore, + + foo / bar + + will accept <foo> or <bar>. + + + + + + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 6] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + + NOTE: + + A quoted string containing alphabetic characters is a special form + for specifying alternative characters and is interpreted as a + non-terminal representing the set of combinatorial strings with + the contained characters, in the specified order but with any + mixture of upper and lower case. + +3.3. Incremental Alternatives: Rule1 =/ Rule2 + + It is sometimes convenient to specify a list of alternatives in + fragments. That is, an initial rule may match one or more + alternatives, with later rule definitions adding to the set of + alternatives. This is particularly useful for otherwise, independent + specifications that derive from the same parent rule set, such as + often occurs with parameter lists. ABNF permits this incremental + definition through the construct: + + oldrule =/ additional-alternatives + + So that the rule set + + ruleset = alt1 / alt2 + + ruleset =/ alt3 + + ruleset =/ alt4 / alt5 + + is the same as specifying + + ruleset = alt1 / alt2 / alt3 / alt4 / alt5 + +3.4. Value Range Alternatives: %c##-## + + A range of alternative numeric values can be specified compactly, + using dash ("-") to indicate the range of alternative values. Hence: + + DIGIT = %x30-39 + + is equivalent to: + + DIGIT = "0" / "1" / "2" / "3" / "4" / "5" / "6" / + + "7" / "8" / "9" + + Concatenated numeric values and numeric value ranges cannot be + specified in the same string. A numeric value may use the dotted + notation for concatenation or it may use the dash notation to specify + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 7] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + + one value range. Hence, to specify one printable character between + end of line sequences, the specification could be: + + char-line = %x0D.0A %x20-7E %x0D.0A + +3.5. Sequence Group: (Rule1 Rule2) + + Elements enclosed in parentheses are treated as a single element, + whose contents are STRICTLY ORDERED. Thus, + + elem (foo / bar) blat + + matches (elem foo blat) or (elem bar blat), and + + elem foo / bar blat + + matches (elem foo) or (bar blat). + + NOTE: + + It is strongly advised that grouping notation be used, rather than + relying on the proper reading of "bare" alternations, when + alternatives consist of multiple rule names or literals. + + Hence, it is recommended that the following form be used: + + (elem foo) / (bar blat) + + It will avoid misinterpretation by casual readers. + + The sequence group notation is also used within free text to set off + an element sequence from the prose. + +3.6. Variable Repetition: *Rule + + The operator "*" preceding an element indicates repetition. The full + form is: + + <a>*<b>element + + where <a> and <b> are optional decimal values, indicating at least + <a> and at most <b> occurrences of the element. + + Default values are 0 and infinity so that *<element> allows any + number, including zero; 1*<element> requires at least one; + 3*3<element> allows exactly 3 and 1*2<element> allows one or two. + + + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 8] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + +3.7. Specific Repetition: nRule + + A rule of the form: + + <n>element + + is equivalent to + + <n>*<n>element + + That is, exactly <n> occurrences of <element>. Thus, 2DIGIT is a 2- + digit number, and 3ALPHA is a string of three alphabetic characters. + +3.8. Optional Sequence: [RULE] + + Square brackets enclose an optional element sequence: + + [foo bar] + + is equivalent to + + *1(foo bar). + +3.9. Comment: ; Comment + + A semi-colon starts a comment that continues to the end of line. + This is a simple way of including useful notes in parallel with the + specifications. + +3.10. Operator Precedence + + The various mechanisms described above have the following precedence, + from highest (binding tightest) at the top, to lowest (loosest) at + the bottom: + + Strings, Names formation + + Comment + + Value range + + Repetition + + Grouping, Optional + + Concatenation + + Alternative + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 9] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + + Use of the alternative operator, freely mixed with concatenations, + can be confusing. + + Again, it is recommended that the grouping operator be used to + make explicit concatenation groups. + +4. ABNF DEFINITION OF ABNF + + NOTES: + + 1. This syntax requires a formatting of rules that is relatively + strict. Hence, the version of a ruleset included in a + specification might need preprocessing to ensure that it can be + interpreted by an ABNF parser. + + 2. This syntax uses the rules provided in Appendix B (Core). + + rulelist = 1*( rule / (*c-wsp c-nl) ) + + rule = rulename defined-as elements c-nl + ; continues if next line starts + ; with white space + + rulename = ALPHA *(ALPHA / DIGIT / "-") + + defined-as = *c-wsp ("=" / "=/") *c-wsp + ; basic rules definition and + ; incremental alternatives + + elements = alternation *c-wsp + + c-wsp = WSP / (c-nl WSP) + + c-nl = comment / CRLF + ; comment or newline + + comment = ";" *(WSP / VCHAR) CRLF + + alternation = concatenation + *(*c-wsp "/" *c-wsp concatenation) + + concatenation = repetition *(1*c-wsp repetition) + + repetition = [repeat] element + + repeat = 1*DIGIT / (*DIGIT "*" *DIGIT) + + + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 10] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + + element = rulename / group / option / + char-val / num-val / prose-val + + group = "(" *c-wsp alternation *c-wsp ")" + + option = "[" *c-wsp alternation *c-wsp "]" + + char-val = DQUOTE *(%x20-21 / %x23-7E) DQUOTE + ; quoted string of SP and VCHAR + ; without DQUOTE + + num-val = "%" (bin-val / dec-val / hex-val) + + bin-val = "b" 1*BIT + [ 1*("." 1*BIT) / ("-" 1*BIT) ] + ; series of concatenated bit values + ; or single ONEOF range + + dec-val = "d" 1*DIGIT + [ 1*("." 1*DIGIT) / ("-" 1*DIGIT) ] + + hex-val = "x" 1*HEXDIG + [ 1*("." 1*HEXDIG) / ("-" 1*HEXDIG) ] + + prose-val = "<" *(%x20-3D / %x3F-7E) ">" + ; bracketed string of SP and VCHAR + ; without angles + ; prose description, to be used as + ; last resort + +5. SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS + + Security is truly believed to be irrelevant to this document. + +6. References + +6.1. Normative References + + [US-ASCII] American National Standards Institute, "Coded Character + Set -- 7-bit American Standard Code for Information + Interchange", ANSI X3.4, 1986. + +6.2. Informative References + + [RFC2234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax + Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997. + + + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 11] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + + [RFC733] Crocker, D., Vittal, J., Pogran, K., and D. Henderson, + "Standard for the format of ARPA network text messages", + RFC 733, November 1977. + + [RFC822] Crocker, D., "Standard for the format of ARPA Internet + text messages", STD 11, RFC 822, August 1982. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 12] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + +Appendix A. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS + + The syntax for ABNF was originally specified in RFC 733. Ken L. + Harrenstien, of SRI International, was responsible for re-coding the + BNF into an augmented BNF that makes the representation smaller and + easier to understand. + + This recent project began as a simple effort to cull out the portion + of RFC 822 that has been repeatedly cited by non-email specification + writers, namely the description of augmented BNF. Rather than simply + and blindly converting the existing text into a separate document, + the working group chose to give careful consideration to the + deficiencies, as well as benefits, of the existing specification and + related specifications made available over the last 15 years, and + therefore to pursue enhancement. This turned the project into + something rather more ambitious than was first intended. + Interestingly, the result is not massively different from that + original, although decisions, such as removing the list notation, + came as a surprise. + + This "separated" version of the specification was part of the DRUMS + working group, with significant contributions from Jerome Abela, + Harald Alvestrand, Robert Elz, Roger Fajman, Aviva Garrett, Tom + Harsch, Dan Kohn, Bill McQuillan, Keith Moore, Chris Newman, Pete + Resnick, and Henning Schulzrinne. + + Julian Reschke warrants a special thanks for converting the Draft + Standard version to XML source form. + +Appendix B. APPENDIX - CORE ABNF OF ABNF + + This Appendix is provided as a convenient core for specific grammars. + The definitions may be used as a core set of rules. + +B.1. Core Rules + + Certain basic rules are in uppercase, such as SP, HTAB, CRLF, DIGIT, + ALPHA, etc. + + ALPHA = %x41-5A / %x61-7A ; A-Z / a-z + + BIT = "0" / "1" + + CHAR = %x01-7F + ; any 7-bit US-ASCII character, + ; excluding NUL + + + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 13] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + + CR = %x0D + ; carriage return + + CRLF = CR LF + ; Internet standard newline + + CTL = %x00-1F / %x7F + ; controls + + DIGIT = %x30-39 + ; 0-9 + + DQUOTE = %x22 + ; " (Double Quote) + + HEXDIG = DIGIT / "A" / "B" / "C" / "D" / "E" / "F" + + HTAB = %x09 + ; horizontal tab + + LF = %x0A + ; linefeed + + LWSP = *(WSP / CRLF WSP) + ; linear white space (past newline) + + OCTET = %x00-FF + ; 8 bits of data + + SP = %x20 + + VCHAR = %x21-7E + ; visible (printing) characters + + WSP = SP / HTAB + ; white space + +B.2. Common Encoding + + Externally, data are represented as "network virtual ASCII" (namely, + 7-bit US-ASCII in an 8-bit field), with the high (8th) bit set to + zero. A string of values is in "network byte order", in which the + higher-valued bytes are represented on the left-hand side and are + sent over the network first. + + + + + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 14] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + +Authors' Addresses + + Dave Crocker (editor) + Brandenburg InternetWorking + 675 Spruce Dr. + Sunnyvale, CA 94086 + US + + Phone: +1.408.246.8253 + EMail: [email protected] + + + Paul Overell + THUS plc. + 1/2 Berkeley Square + 99 Berkeley Street + Glasgow + G3 7HR + UK + + EMail: [email protected] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 15] + +RFC 4234 ABNF October 2005 + + +Full Copyright Statement + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). + + 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- + +Acknowledgement + + Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the + Internet Society. + + + + + + + +Crocker & Overell Standards Track [Page 16] + |