分享
 
 
 

http1.1---7

王朝other·作者佚名  2006-01-08
窄屏简体版  字體: |||超大  

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 85]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

o If only a Last-Modified value has been provided by the origin

server, SHOULD use that value in non-subrange cache-conditional

requests (using If-Modified-Since).

o If only a Last-Modified value has been provided by an HTTP/1.0

origin server, MAY use that value in subrange cache-conditional

requests (using If-Unmodified-Since:). The user agent should

provide a way to disable this, in case of difficulty.

o If both an entity tag and a Last-Modified value have been

provided by the origin server, SHOULD use both validators in

cache-conditional requests. This allows both HTTP/1.0 and

HTTP/1.1 caches to respond appropriately.

An HTTP/1.1 cache, upon receiving a request, MUST use the most

restrictive validator when deciding whether the client's cache entry

matches the cache's own cache entry. This is only an issue when the

request contains both an entity tag and a last-modified-date

validator (If-Modified-Since or If-Unmodified-Since).

A note on rationale: The general principle behind these rules is

that HTTP/1.1 servers and clients should transmit as much non-

redundant information as is available in their responses and

requests. HTTP/1.1 systems receiving this information will make the

most conservative assumptions about the validators they receive.

HTTP/1.0 clients and caches will ignore entity tags. Generally,

last-modified values received or used by these systems will support

transparent and efficient caching, and so HTTP/1.1 origin servers

should provide Last-Modified values. In those rare cases where the

use of a Last-Modified value as a validator by an HTTP/1.0 system

could result in a serious problem, then HTTP/1.1 origin servers

should not provide one.

13.3.5 Non-validating Conditionals

The principle behind entity tags is that only the service author

knows the semantics of a resource well enough to select an

appropriate cache validation mechanism, and the specification of any

validator comparison function more complex than byte-equality would

open up a can of worms. Thus, comparisons of any other headers

(except Last-Modified, for compatibility with HTTP/1.0) are never

used for purposes of validating a cache entry.

13.4 Response Cachability

Unless specifically constrained by a Cache-Control (section 14.9)

directive, a caching system may always store a successful response

(see section 13.8) as a cache entry, may return it without validation

if it is fresh, and may return it after successful validation. If

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 86]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

there is neither a cache validator nor an explicit expiration time

associated with a response, we do not expect it to be cached, but

certain caches may violate this expectation (for example, when little

or no network connectivity is available). A client can usually detect

that such a response was taken from a cache by comparing the Date

header to the current time.

Note that some HTTP/1.0 caches are known to violate this

expectation without providing any Warning.

However, in some cases it may be inappropriate for a cache to retain

an entity, or to return it in response to a subsequent request. This

may be because absolute semantic transparency is deemed necessary by

the service author, or because of security or privacy considerations.

Certain Cache-Control directives are therefore provided so that the

server can indicate that certain resource entities, or portions

thereof, may not be cached regardless of other considerations.

Note that section 14.8 normally prevents a shared cache from saving

and returning a response to a previous request if that request

included an Authorization header.

A response received with a status code of 200, 203, 206, 300, 301 or

410 may be stored by a cache and used in reply to a subsequent

request, subject to the expiration mechanism, unless a Cache-Control

directive prohibits caching. However, a cache that does not support

the Range and Content-Range headers MUST NOT cache 206 (Partial

Content) responses.

A response received with any other status code MUST NOT be returned

in a reply to a subsequent request unless there are Cache-Control

directives or another header(s) that explicitly allow it. For

example, these include the following: an Expires header (section

14.21); a "max-age", "must-revalidate", "proxy-revalidate", "public"

or "private" Cache-Control directive (section 14.9).

13.5 Constructing Responses From Caches

The purpose of an HTTP cache is to store information received in

response to requests, for use in responding to future requests. In

many cases, a cache simply returns the appropriate parts of a

response to the requester. However, if the cache holds a cache entry

based on a previous response, it may have to combine parts of a new

response with what is held in the cache entry.

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 87]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

13.5.1 End-to-end and Hop-by-hop Headers

For the purpose of defining the behavior of caches and non-caching

proxies, we divide HTTP headers into two categories:

o End-to-end headers, which must be transmitted to the

ultimate recipient of a request or response. End-to-end

headers in responses must be stored as part of a cache entry

and transmitted in any response formed from a cache entry.

o Hop-by-hop headers, which are meaningful only for a single

transport-level connection, and are not stored by caches or

forwarded by proxies.

The following HTTP/1.1 headers are hop-by-hop headers:

o Connection

o Keep-Alive

o Public

o Proxy-Authenticate

o Transfer-Encoding

o Upgrade

All other headers defined by HTTP/1.1 are end-to-end headers.

Hop-by-hop headers introduced in future versions of HTTP MUST be

listed in a Connection header, as described in section 14.10.

13.5.2 Non-modifiable Headers

Some features of the HTTP/1.1 protocol, such as Digest

Authentication, depend on the value of certain end-to-end headers. A

cache or non-caching proxy SHOULD NOT modify an end-to-end header

unless the definition of that header requires or specifically allows

that.

A cache or non-caching proxy MUST NOT modify any of the following

fields in a request or response, nor may it add any of these fields

if not already present:

o Content-Location

o ETag

o Expires

o Last-Modified

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 88]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

A cache or non-caching proxy MUST NOT modify or add any of the

following fields in a response that contains the no-transform Cache-

Control directive, or in any request:

o Content-Encoding

o Content-Length

o Content-Range

o Content-Type

A cache or non-caching proxy MAY modify or add these fields in a

response that does not include no-transform, but if it does so, it

MUST add a Warning 14 (Transformation applied) if one does not

already appear in the response.

Warning: unnecessary modification of end-to-end headers may cause

authentication failures if stronger authentication mechanisms are

introduced in later versions of HTTP. Such authentication

mechanisms may rely on the values of header fields not listed here.

13.5.3 Combining Headers

When a cache makes a validating request to a server, and the server

provides a 304 (Not Modified) response, the cache must construct a

response to send to the requesting client. The cache uses the

entity-body stored in the cache entry as the entity-body of this

outgoing response. The end-to-end headers stored in the cache entry

are used for the constructed response, except that any end-to-end

headers provided in the 304 response MUST replace the corresponding

headers from the cache entry. Unless the cache decides to remove the

cache entry, it MUST also replace the end-to-end headers stored with

the cache entry with corresponding headers received in the incoming

response.

In other words, the set of end-to-end headers received in the

incoming response overrides all corresponding end-to-end headers

stored with the cache entry. The cache may add Warning headers (see

section 14.45) to this set.

If a header field-name in the incoming response matches more than one

header in the cache entry, all such old headers are replaced.

Note: this rule allows an origin server to use a 304 (Not Modified)

response to update any header associated with a previous response

for the same entity, although it might not always be meaningful or

correct to do so. This rule does not allow an origin server to use

a 304 (not Modified) response to entirely delete a header that it

had provided with a previous response.

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 89]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

13.5.4 Combining Byte Ranges

A response may transfer only a subrange of the bytes of an entity-

body, either because the request included one or more Range

specifications, or because a connection was broken prematurely. After

several such transfers, a cache may have received several ranges of

the same entity-body.

If a cache has a stored non-empty set of subranges for an entity, and

an incoming response transfers another subrange, the cache MAY

combine the new subrange with the existing set if both the following

conditions are met:

o Both the incoming response and the cache entry must have a cache

validator.

o The two cache validators must match using the strong comparison

function (see section 13.3.3).

If either requirement is not meant, the cache must use only the most

recent partial response (based on the Date values transmitted with

every response, and using the incoming response if these values are

equal or missing), and must discard the other partial information.

13.6 Caching Negotiated Responses

Use of server-driven content negotiation (section 12), as indicated

by the presence of a Vary header field in a response, alters the

conditions and procedure by which a cache can use the response for

subsequent requests.

A server MUST use the Vary header field (section 14.43) to inform a

cache of what header field dimensions are used to select among

multiple representations of a cachable response. A cache may use the

selected representation (the entity included with that particular

response) for replying to subsequent requests on that resource only

when the subsequent requests have the same or equivalent values for

all header fields specified in the Vary response-header. Requests

with a different value for one or more of those header fields would

be forwarded toward the origin server.

If an entity tag was assigned to the representation, the forwarded

request SHOULD be conditional and include the entity tags in an If-

None-Match header field from all its cache entries for the Request-

URI. This conveys to the server the set of entities currently held by

the cache, so that if any one of these entities matches the requested

entity, the server can use the ETag header in its 304 (Not Modified)

response to tell the cache which entry is appropriate. If the

entity-tag of the new response matches that of an existing entry, the

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 90]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

new response SHOULD be used to update the header fields of the

existing entry, and the result MUST be returned to the client.

The Vary header field may also inform the cache that the

representation was selected using criteria not limited to the

request-headers; in this case, a cache MUST NOT use the response in a

reply to a subsequent request unless the cache relays the new request

to the origin server in a conditional request and the server responds

with 304 (Not Modified), including an entity tag or Content-Location

that indicates which entity should be used.

If any of the existing cache entries contains only partial content

for the associated entity, its entity-tag SHOULD NOT be included in

the If-None-Match header unless the request is for a range that would

be fully satisfied by that entry.

If a cache receives a successful response whose Content-Location

field matches that of an existing cache entry for the same Request-

URI, whose entity-tag differs from that of the existing entry, and

whose Date is more recent than that of the existing entry, the

existing entry SHOULD NOT be returned in response to future requests,

and should be deleted from the cache.

13.7 Shared and Non-Shared Caches

For reasons of security and privacy, it is necessary to make a

distinction between "shared" and "non-shared" caches. A non-shared

cache is one that is accessible only to a single user. Accessibility

in this case SHOULD be enforced by appropriate security mechanisms.

All other caches are considered to be "shared." Other sections of

this specification place certain constraints on the operation of

shared caches in order to prevent loss of privacy or failure of

access controls.

13.8 Errors or Incomplete Response Cache Behavior

A cache that receives an incomplete response (for example, with fewer

bytes of data than specified in a Content-Length header) may store

the response. However, the cache MUST treat this as a partial

response. Partial responses may be combined as described in section

13.5.4; the result might be a full response or might still be

partial. A cache MUST NOT return a partial response to a client

without explicitly marking it as such, using the 206 (Partial

Content) status code. A cache MUST NOT return a partial response

using a status code of 200 (OK).

If a cache receives a 5xx response while attempting to revalidate an

entry, it may either forward this response to the requesting client,

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 91]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

or act as if the server failed to respond. In the latter case, it MAY

return a previously received response unless the cached entry

includes the "must-revalidate" Cache-Control directive (see section

14.9).

13.9 Side Effects of GET and HEAD

Unless the origin server explicitly prohibits the caching of their

responses, the application of GET and HEAD methods to any resources

SHOULD NOT have side effects that would lead to erroneous behavior if

these responses are taken from a cache. They may still have side

effects, but a cache is not required to consider such side effects in

its caching decisions. Caches are always expected to observe an

origin server's explicit restrictions on caching.

We note one exception to this rule: since some applications have

traditionally used GETs and HEADs with query URLs (those containing a

"?" in the rel_path part) to perform operations with significant side

effects, caches MUST NOT treat responses to such URLs as fresh unless

the server provides an explicit expiration time. This specifically

means that responses from HTTP/1.0 servers for such URIs should not

be taken from a cache. See section 9.1.1 for related information.

13.10 Invalidation After Updates or Deletions

The effect of certain methods at the origin server may cause one or

more existing cache entries to become non-transparently invalid. That

is, although they may continue to be "fresh," they do not accurately

reflect what the origin server would return for a new request.

There is no way for the HTTP protocol to guarantee that all such

cache entries are marked invalid. For example, the request that

caused the change at the origin server may not have gone through the

proxy where a cache entry is stored. However, several rules help

reduce the likelihood of erroneous behavior.

In this section, the phrase "invalidate an entity" means that the

cache should either remove all instances of that entity from its

storage, or should mark these as "invalid" and in need of a mandatory

revalidation before they can be returned in response to a subsequent

request.

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 92]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

Some HTTP methods may invalidate an entity. This is either the entity

referred to by the Request-URI, or by the Location or Content-

Location response-headers (if present). These methods are:

o PUT

o DELETE

o POST

In order to prevent denial of service attacks, an invalidation based

on the URI in a Location or Content-Location header MUST only be

performed if the host part is the same as in the Request-URI.

13.11 Write-Through Mandatory

All methods that may be expected to cause modifications to the origin

server's resources MUST be written through to the origin server. This

currently includes all methods except for GET and HEAD. A cache MUST

NOT reply to such a request from a client before having transmitted

the request to the inbound server, and having received a

corresponding response from the inbound server. This does not prevent

a cache from sending a 100 (Continue) response before the inbound

server has replied.

The alternative (known as "write-back" or "copy-back" caching) is not

allowed in HTTP/1.1, due to the difficulty of providing consistent

updates and the problems arising from server, cache, or network

failure prior to write-back.

13.12 Cache Replacement

If a new cachable (see sections 14.9.2, 13.2.5, 13.2.6 and 13.8)

response is received from a resource while any existing responses for

the same resource are cached, the cache SHOULD use the new response

to reply to the current request. It may insert it into cache storage

and may, if it meets all other requirements, use it to respond to any

future requests that would previously have caused the old response to

be returned. If it inserts the new response into cache storage it

should follow the rules in section 13.5.3.

Note: a new response that has an older Date header value than

existing cached responses is not cachable.

13.13 History Lists

User agents often have history mechanisms, such as "Back" buttons and

history lists, which can be used to redisplay an entity retrieved

earlier in a session.

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 93]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

History mechanisms and caches are different. In particular history

mechanisms SHOULD NOT try to show a semantically transparent view of

the current state of a resource. Rather, a history mechanism is meant

to show exactly what the user saw at the time when the resource was

retrieved.

By default, an expiration time does not apply to history mechanisms.

If the entity is still in storage, a history mechanism should display

it even if the entity has expired, unless the user has specifically

configured the agent to refresh expired history documents.

This should not be construed to prohibit the history mechanism from

telling the user that a view may be stale.

Note: if history list mechanisms unnecessarily prevent users from

viewing stale resources, this will tend to force service authors to

avoid using HTTP expiration controls and cache controls when they

would otherwise like to. Service authors may consider it important

that users not be presented with error messages or warning messages

when they use navigation controls (such as BACK) to view previously

fetched resources. Even though sometimes such resources ought not

to cached, or ought to expire quickly, user interface

considerations may force service authors to resort to other means

of preventing caching (e.g. "once-only" URLs) in order not to

suffer the effects of improperly functioning history mechanisms.

14 Header Field Definitions

This section defines the syntax and semantics of all standard

HTTP/1.1 header fields. For entity-header fields, both sender and

recipient refer to either the client or the server, depending on who

sends and who receives the entity.

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 94]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

14.1 Accept

The Accept request-header field can be used to specify certain media

types which are acceptable for the response. Accept headers can be

used to indicate that the request is specifically limited to a small

set of desired types, as in the case of a request for an in-line

image.

Accept = "Accept" ":"

#( media-range [ accept-params ] )

media-range = ( "*/*"

| ( type "/" "*" )

| ( type "/" subtype )

) *( ";" parameter )

accept-params = ";" "q" "=" qvalue *( accept-extension )

accept-extension = ";" token [ "=" ( token | quoted-string ) ]

The asterisk "*" character is used to group media types into ranges,

with "*/*" indicating all media types and "type/*" indicating all

subtypes of that type. The media-range MAY include media type

parameters that are applicable to that range.

Each media-range MAY be followed by one or more accept-params,

beginning with the "q" parameter for indicating a relative quality

factor. The first "q" parameter (if any) separates the media-range

parameter(s) from the accept-params. Quality factors allow the user

or user agent to indicate the relative degree of preference for that

media-range, using the qvalue scale from 0 to 1 (section 3.9). The

default value is q=1.

Note: Use of the "q" parameter name to separate media type

parameters from Accept extension parameters is due to historical

practice. Although this prevents any media type parameter named

"q" from being used with a media range, such an event is believed

to be unlikely given the lack of any "q" parameters in the IANA

media type registry and the rare usage of any media type parameters

in Accept. Future media types should be discouraged from

registering any parameter named "q".

The example

Accept: audio/*; q=0.2, audio/basic

SHOULD be interpreted as "I prefer audio/basic, but send me any audio

type if it is the best available after an 80% mark-down in quality."

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 95]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

If no Accept header field is present, then it is assumed that the

client accepts all media types. If an Accept header field is present,

and if the server cannot send a response which is acceptable

according to the combined Accept field value, then the server SHOULD

send a 406 (not acceptable) response.

A more elaborate example is

Accept: text/plain; q=0.5, text/html,

text/x-dvi; q=0.8, text/x-c

Verbally, this would be interpreted as "text/html and text/x-c are

the preferred media types, but if they do not exist, then send the

text/x-dvi entity, and if that does not exist, send the text/plain

entity."

Media ranges can be overridden by more specific media ranges or

specific media types. If more than one media range applies to a given

type, the most specific reference has precedence. For example,

Accept: text/*, text/html, text/html;level=1, */*

have the following precedence:

1) text/html;level=1

2) text/html

3) text/*

4) */*

The media type quality factor associated with a given type is

determined by finding the media range with the highest precedence

which matches that type. For example,

Accept: text/*;q=0.3, text/html;q=0.7, text/html;level=1,

text/html;level=2;q=0.4, */*;q=0.5

would cause the following values to be associated:

text/html;level=1 = 1

text/html = 0.7

text/plain = 0.3

image/jpeg = 0.5

text/html;level=2 = 0.4

text/html;level=3 = 0.7

Note: A user agent may be provided with a default set of quality

values for certain media ranges. However, unless the user agent is

a closed system which cannot interact with other rendering agents,

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 96]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

this default set should be configurable by the user.

14.2 Accept-Charset

The Accept-Charset request-header field can be used to indicate what

character sets are acceptable for the response. This field allows

clients capable of understanding more comprehensive or special-

purpose character sets to signal that capability to a server which is

capable of representing documents in those character sets. The ISO-

8859-1 character set can be assumed to be acceptable to all user

agents.

Accept-Charset = "Accept-Charset" ":"

1#( charset [ ";" "q" "=" qvalue ] )

Character set values are described in section 3.4. Each charset may

be given an associated quality value which represents the user's

preference for that charset. The default value is q=1. An example is

Accept-Charset: iso-8859-5, unicode-1-1;q=0.8

If no Accept-Charset header is present, the default is that any

character set is acceptable. If an Accept-Charset header is present,

and if the server cannot send a response which is acceptable

according to the Accept-Charset header, then the server SHOULD send

an error response with the 406 (not acceptable) status code, though

the sending of an unacceptable response is also allowed.

14.3 Accept-Encoding

The Accept-Encoding request-header field is similar to Accept, but

restricts the content-coding values (section 14.12) which are

acceptable in the response.

Accept-Encoding = "Accept-Encoding" ":"

#( content-coding )

An example of its use is

Accept-Encoding: compress, gzip

If no Accept-Encoding header is present in a request, the server MAY

assume that the client will accept any content coding. If an Accept-

Encoding header is present, and if the server cannot send a response

which is acceptable according to the Accept-Encoding header, then the

server SHOULD send an error response with the 406 (Not Acceptable)

status code.

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 97]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

An empty Accept-Encoding value indicates none are acceptable.

14.4 Accept-Language

The Accept-Language request-header field is similar to Accept, but

restricts the set of natural languages that are preferred as a

response to the request.

Accept-Language = "Accept-Language" ":"

1#( language-range [ ";" "q" "=" qvalue ] )

language-range = ( ( 1*8ALPHA *( "-" 1*8ALPHA ) ) | "*" )

Each language-range MAY be given an associated quality value which

represents an estimate of the user's preference for the languages

specified by that range. The quality value defaults to "q=1". For

example,

Accept-Language: da, en-gb;q=0.8, en;q=0.7

would mean: "I prefer Danish, but will accept British English and

other types of English." A language-range matches a language-tag if

it exactly equals the tag, or if it exactly equals a prefix of the

tag such that the first tag character following the prefix is "-".

The special range "*", if present in the Accept-Language field,

matches every tag not matched by any other range present in the

Accept-Language field.

Note: This use of a prefix matching rule does not imply that

language tags are assigned to languages in such a way that it is

always true that if a user understands a language with a certain

tag, then this user will also understand all languages with tags

for which this tag is a prefix. The prefix rule simply allows the

use of prefix tags if this is the case.

The language quality factor assigned to a language-tag by the

Accept-Language field is the quality value of the longest language-

range in the field that matches the language-tag. If no language-

range in the field matches the tag, the language quality factor

assigned is 0. If no Accept-Language header is present in the

request, the server SHOULD assume that all languages are equally

acceptable. If an Accept-Language header is present, then all

languages which are assigned a quality factor greater than 0 are

acceptable.

It may be contrary to the privacy expectations of the user to send an

Accept-Language header with the complete linguistic preferences of

the user in every request. For a discussion of this issue, see

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 98]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

section 15.7.

Note: As intelligibility is highly dependent on the individual

user, it is recommended that client applications make the choice of

linguistic preference available to the user. If the choice is not

made available, then the Accept-Language header field must not be

given in the request.

14.5 Accept-Ranges

The Accept-Ranges response-header field allows the server to indicate

its acceptance of range requests for a resource:

Accept-Ranges = "Accept-Ranges" ":" acceptable-ranges

acceptable-ranges = 1#range-unit | "none"

Origin servers that accept byte-range requests MAY send

Accept-Ranges: bytes

but are not required to do so. Clients MAY generate byte-range

requests without having received this header for the resource

involved.

Servers that do not accept any kind of range request for a resource

MAY send

Accept-Ranges: none

to advise the client not to attempt a range request.

14.6 Age

The Age response-header field conveys the sender's estimate of the

amount of time since the response (or its revalidation) was generated

at the origin server. A cached response is "fresh" if its age does

not exceed its freshness lifetime. Age values are calculated as

specified in section 13.2.3.

Age = "Age" ":" age-value

age-value = delta-seconds

Age values are non-negative decimal integers, representing time in

seconds.

Fielding, et. al. Standards Track [Page 99]

RFC 2068 HTTP/1.1 January 1997

If a cache receives a value larger than the largest positive integer

it can represent, or if any of its age calculations overflows, it

MUST transmit an Age header with a value of 2147483648 (2^31).

HTTP/1.1 caches MUST send an Age header in every response. Caches

SHOULD use an arithmetic type of at least 31 bits of range.

14.7 Allow

The Allow entity-header field lists the set of methods supported by

the resource identified by the Request-URI. The purpose of this field

is strictly to inform the recipient of valid methods associated with

the resource. An Allow header field MUST be present in a 405 (Method

Not Allowed) response.

Allow = "Allow" ":" 1#method

Example of use:

Allow: GET, HEAD, PUT

This field cannot prevent a client from trying other methods.

However, the indications given by the Allow header field value SHOULD

be followed. The actual set of allowed methods is defined by the

origin server at the time of each request.

The Allow header field MAY be provided with a PUT request to

recommend the methods to be supported by the new or modified

resource. The server is not required to support these methods and

SHOULD include an Allow header in the response giving the actual

supported methods.

A proxy MUST NOT modify the Allow header field even if it does not

understand all the methods specified, since the user agent MAY have

other means of communicating with the origin server.

The Allow header field does not indicate what methods are implemented

at the server level. Servers MAY use the Public response-header field

(section 14.35) to describe what methods are implemented on the

server as a whole.

14.8 Authorization

A user agent that wishes to authenticate itself with a server--

usually, but not necessarily, after receiving a 401 response--MAY do

so by including an Authorization request-header field with the

request. The Authorization field value consists of credentials

containing the authentication information of the user agent for the

realm of the resource being requested.

谁翻译了别忘了给我发一份 xzjxu@126.com

 
 
 
免责声明:本文为网络用户发布,其观点仅代表作者个人观点,与本站无关,本站仅提供信息存储服务。文中陈述内容未经本站证实,其真实性、完整性、及时性本站不作任何保证或承诺,请读者仅作参考,并请自行核实相关内容。
2023年上半年GDP全球前十五强
 百态   2023-10-24
美众议院议长启动对拜登的弹劾调查
 百态   2023-09-13
上海、济南、武汉等多地出现不明坠落物
 探索   2023-09-06
印度或要将国名改为“巴拉特”
 百态   2023-09-06
男子为女友送行,买票不登机被捕
 百态   2023-08-20
手机地震预警功能怎么开?
 干货   2023-08-06
女子4年卖2套房花700多万做美容:不但没变美脸,面部还出现变形
 百态   2023-08-04
住户一楼被水淹 还冲来8头猪
 百态   2023-07-31
女子体内爬出大量瓜子状活虫
 百态   2023-07-25
地球连续35年收到神秘规律性信号,网友:不要回答!
 探索   2023-07-21
全球镓价格本周大涨27%
 探索   2023-07-09
钱都流向了那些不缺钱的人,苦都留给了能吃苦的人
 探索   2023-07-02
倩女手游刀客魅者强控制(强混乱强眩晕强睡眠)和对应控制抗性的关系
 百态   2020-08-20
美国5月9日最新疫情:美国确诊人数突破131万
 百态   2020-05-09
荷兰政府宣布将集体辞职
 干货   2020-04-30
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案逍遥观:鹏程万里
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案神机营:射石饮羽
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案昆仑山:拔刀相助
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案天工阁:鬼斧神工
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案丝路古道:单枪匹马
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案镇郊荒野:与虎谋皮
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案镇郊荒野:李代桃僵
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案镇郊荒野:指鹿为马
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案金陵:小鸟依人
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案金陵:千金买邻
 干货   2019-11-12
 
推荐阅读
 
 
 
>>返回首頁<<
 
靜靜地坐在廢墟上,四周的荒凉一望無際,忽然覺得,淒涼也很美
© 2005- 王朝網路 版權所有