This document is obsolete. Please
refer to RFC 5234.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:
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:
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.
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.
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
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.
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: dcrocker@bbiw.net
Paul Overell THUS plc. 1/2 Berkeley Square 99 Berkeley Street Glasgow G3 7HR UK
EMail: paul.overell@thus.net
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- ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society.