draft-ietf-cbor-tags-oid-02.txt		draft-ietf-cbor-tags-oid-03.txt
	Network Working Group C. Bormann		Network Working Group C. Bormann
	Internet-Draft Universität Bremen TZI		Internet-Draft Universität Bremen TZI
	Intended status: Standards Track S. Leonard		Intended status: Standards Track S. Leonard
	Expires: 1 May 2021 Penango, Inc.		Expires: 21 May 2021 Penango, Inc.
	28 October 2020		17 November 2020
	Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Tags for Object Identifiers		Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Tags for Object Identifiers
	draft-ietf-cbor-tags-oid-02		draft-ietf-cbor-tags-oid-03
	Abstract		Abstract
	The Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR, draft-ietf-cbor-		The Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR, draft-ietf-cbor-
	7049bis) is a data format whose design goals include the possibility		7049bis) is a data format whose design goals include the possibility
	of extremely small code size, fairly small message size, and		of extremely small code size, fairly small message size, and
	extensibility without the need for version negotiation.		extensibility without the need for version negotiation.
	The present document defines CBOR tags for object identifiers (OIDs).		The present document defines CBOR tags for object identifiers (OIDs).
	It is intended as the reference document for the IANA registration of		It is intended as the reference document for the IANA registration of
	skipping to change at page 1, line 38 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 38 ¶
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on 1 May 2021.		This Internet-Draft will expire on 21 May 2021.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
	license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.		license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
	Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights		Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
	skipping to change at page 2, line 17 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 17 ¶
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	2. Object Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		2. Object Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		3. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	4. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		4. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	5. Tag Factoring with OID Arrays and Maps . . . . . . . . . . . 6		5. Tag Factoring with OID Arrays and Maps . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	6. Applications and Examples of OIDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		6. Applications and Examples of OIDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	7. CDDL Control Operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		7. CDDL Control Operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		8. CDDL typenames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
			11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	The Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR,		The Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR,
	[I-D.ietf-cbor-7049bis]) provides for the interchange of structured		[I-D.ietf-cbor-7049bis]) provides for the interchange of structured
	data without a requirement for a pre-agreed schema.		data without a requirement for a pre-agreed schema.
	[I-D.ietf-cbor-7049bis] defines a basic set of data types, as well as		[I-D.ietf-cbor-7049bis] defines a basic set of data types, as well as
	a tagging mechanism that enables extending the set of data types		a tagging mechanism that enables extending the set of data types
	supported via an IANA registry.		supported via an IANA registry.
	skipping to change at page 4, line 21 ¶		skipping to change at page 4, line 21 ¶
	Tag TBD111: tags a byte string as the [X.690] encoding of an absolute		Tag TBD111: tags a byte string as the [X.690] encoding of an absolute
	object identifier (simply "object identifier" or "OID").		object identifier (simply "object identifier" or "OID").
	Tag TBD110: tags a byte string as the [X.690] encoding of a relative		Tag TBD110: tags a byte string as the [X.690] encoding of a relative
	object identifier (also "relative OID"). Since the encoding of each		object identifier (also "relative OID"). Since the encoding of each
	number is the same as for [RFC6256] Self-Delimiting Numeric Values		number is the same as for [RFC6256] Self-Delimiting Numeric Values
	(SDNVs), this tag can also be used for tagging a byte string that		(SDNVs), this tag can also be used for tagging a byte string that
	contains a sequence of zero or more SDNVs.		contains a sequence of zero or more SDNVs.
			Tag TBD112: structurally like TBD110, but understood to be relative
			to "1.3.6.1.4.1" (IANA Private Enterprise Number OID). Hence, the
			semantics of the result are that of an absolute object identifier.
	2.1. Requirements on the byte string being tagged		2.1. Requirements on the byte string being tagged
	To form a valid tag, a byte string tagged by TBD111 or TBD110 MUST be		To form a valid tag, a byte string tagged by TBD111, TBD110, or
	a syntactically valid BER representation of an object identifier: A		TBD112 MUST be a syntactically valid BER representation of an object
	concatenation of zero or more SDNV values, where each SDNV value is a		identifier: A concatenation of zero or more SDNV values, where each
	sequence of one or more bytes that all have their most significant		SDNV value is a sequence of one or more bytes that all have their
	bit set, except for the last byte, where it must be unset; the first		most significant bit set, except for the last byte, where it must be
	byte of each SDNV cannot be 0x80 (which would be a leading zero in		unset; the first byte of each SDNV cannot be 0x80 (which would be a
	SDNV's base-128 arithmetic).		leading zero in SDNV's base-128 arithmetic).
	In other words:		In other words:
	* its first byte, and any byte that follows a byte that has the most		* its first byte, and any byte that follows a byte that has the most
	significant bit unset, MUST NOT be 0x80 (this requirement requires		significant bit unset, MUST NOT be 0x80 (this requirement requires
	expressing the integer values in their shortest form, with no		expressing the integer values in their shortest form, with no
	leading zeroes)		leading zeroes)
	* its last byte MUST NOT have the most significant bit set (this		* its last byte MUST NOT have the most significant bit set (this
	requirement excludes an incomplete final integer value)		requirement excludes an incomplete final integer value)
	skipping to change at page 5, line 15 ¶		skipping to change at page 5, line 20 ¶
	The valid set of byte strings can also be expressed using regular		The valid set of byte strings can also be expressed using regular
	expressions on bytes, using no specific notation but resembling		expressions on bytes, using no specific notation but resembling
	[PCRE]. Unlike typical regular expressions that operate on character		[PCRE]. Unlike typical regular expressions that operate on character
	sequences, the following regular expressions take bytes as their		sequences, the following regular expressions take bytes as their
	domain, so they can be applied directly to CBOR byte strings.		domain, so they can be applied directly to CBOR byte strings.
	For byte strings with tag TBD111:		For byte strings with tag TBD111:
	"/^(([\x81-\xFF][\x80-\xFF]*)?[\x00-\x7F])+$/"		"/^(([\x81-\xFF][\x80-\xFF]*)?[\x00-\x7F])+$/"
	For byte strings with tag TBD110:		For byte strings with tag TBD110 or TBD112:
	"/^(([\x81-\xFF][\x80-\xFF]*)?[\x00-\x7F])*$/"		"/^(([\x81-\xFF][\x80-\xFF]*)?[\x00-\x7F])*$/"
	A tag with tagged content that does not conform to the applicable		A tag with tagged content that does not conform to the applicable
	regexp is invalid.		regexp is invalid.
	3. Examples		3. Examples
	3.1. Encoding of the SHA-256 OID		3.1. Encoding of the SHA-256 OID
	skipping to change at page 9, line 44 ¶		skipping to change at page 9, line 44 ¶
	country-rdn = {country-oid => country-value}		country-rdn = {country-oid => country-value}
	country-oid = bytes .oid [2, 5, 4, 6]		country-oid = bytes .oid [2, 5, 4, 6]
	country-value = text .size 2		country-value = text .size 2
	Figure 8: Using .oid		Figure 8: Using .oid
	Note that the control type need not be a literal; e.g., "bytes .oid		Note that the control type need not be a literal; e.g., "bytes .oid
	[2, 5, 4, *uint]" matches all OIDs inside OID arc 2.5.4,		[2, 5, 4, *uint]" matches all OIDs inside OID arc 2.5.4,
	"attributeType".		"attributeType".
	8. IANA Considerations		8. CDDL typenames
	8.1. CBOR Tags		For the use with CDDL [RFC8610], the typenames defined in Figure 9
			are recommended:
			oid = #6.111(bstr)
			roid = #6.110(bstr)
			pen = #6.112(bstr)
			Figure 9: Recommended typenames for CDDL
			9. IANA Considerations
			9.1. CBOR Tags
	IANA is requested to assign the CBOR tags in Table 2, with the		IANA is requested to assign the CBOR tags in Table 2, with the
	present document as the specification reference.		present document as the specification reference.
	+========+================+============================+		+========+================+============================+
	| Tag | Data Item | Semantics |		| Tag | Data Item | Semantics |
	+========+================+============================+		+========+================+============================+
	| TBD111 | byte string or | object identifier (BER |		| TBD111 | byte string or | object identifier (BER |
	| | array or map | encoding) |		| | array or map | encoding) |
	+--------+----------------+----------------------------+		+--------+----------------+----------------------------+
	| TBD110 | byte string or | relative object identifier |		| TBD110 | byte string or | relative object identifier |
	| | array or map | (BER encoding); |		| | array or map | (BER encoding); |
	| | | SDNV [RFC6256] sequence |		| | | SDNV [RFC6256] sequence |
	+--------+----------------+----------------------------+		+--------+----------------+----------------------------+
			| TBD112 | byte string or | object identifier (BER |
			| | array or map | encoding), relative to |
			| | | 1.3.6.1.4.1 |
			+--------+----------------+----------------------------+
	Table 2: Values for New Tags		Table 2: Values for New Tags
	8.2. CDDL Control Operators		9.2. CDDL Control Operators
	IANA is requested to assign the CDDL Control Operators in Table 3,		IANA is requested to assign the CDDL Control Operators in Table 3,
	with the present document as the specification reference.		with the present document as the specification reference.
	+==========+============================+		+==========+============================+
	| Name | Reference |		| Name | Reference |
	+==========+============================+		+==========+============================+
	| .sdnv | [this document, Section 7] |		| .sdnv | [this document, Section 7] |
	+----------+----------------------------+		+----------+----------------------------+
	| .sdnvseq | [this document, Section 7] |		| .sdnvseq | [this document, Section 7] |
	+----------+----------------------------+		+----------+----------------------------+
	| .oid | [this document, Section 7] |		| .oid | [this document, Section 7] |
	+----------+----------------------------+		+----------+----------------------------+
	Table 3: New CDDL Operators		Table 3: New CDDL Operators
	9. Security Considerations		10. Security Considerations
	The security considerations of [I-D.ietf-cbor-7049bis] apply.		The security considerations of [I-D.ietf-cbor-7049bis] apply.
	The encodings in Clauses 8.19 and 8.20 of [X.690] are quite compact		The encodings in Clauses 8.19 and 8.20 of [X.690] are quite compact
	and unambiguous, but MUST be followed precisely to avoid security		and unambiguous, but MUST be followed precisely to avoid security
	pitfalls. In particular, the requirements set out in Section 2.1 of		pitfalls. In particular, the requirements set out in Section 2.1 of
	this document need to be followed; otherwise, an attacker may be able		this document need to be followed; otherwise, an attacker may be able
	to subvert a checking process by submitting alternative		to subvert a checking process by submitting alternative
	representations that are later taken as the original (or even		representations that are later taken as the original (or even
	something else entirely) by another decoder supposed to be protected		something else entirely) by another decoder supposed to be protected
	skipping to change at page 11, line 9 ¶		skipping to change at page 11, line 24 ¶
	OIDs and relative OIDs can always be treated as opaque byte strings.		OIDs and relative OIDs can always be treated as opaque byte strings.
	Actually understanding the structure that was used for generating		Actually understanding the structure that was used for generating
	them is not necessary, and, except for checking the structure		them is not necessary, and, except for checking the structure
	requirements, it is strongly NOT RECOMMENDED to perform any		requirements, it is strongly NOT RECOMMENDED to perform any
	processing of this kind (e.g., converting into dotted notation and		processing of this kind (e.g., converting into dotted notation and
	back) unless absolutely necessary. If the OIDs are translated into		back) unless absolutely necessary. If the OIDs are translated into
	other representations, the usual security considerations for non-		other representations, the usual security considerations for non-
	trivial representation conversions apply; the integer values are		trivial representation conversions apply; the integer values are
	unlimited in range.		unlimited in range.
	10. References		11. References
	10.1. Normative References		11.1. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-cbor-7049bis]		[I-D.ietf-cbor-7049bis]
	Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object		Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object
	Representation (CBOR)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,		Representation (CBOR)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
	draft-ietf-cbor-7049bis-16, 30 September 2020,		draft-ietf-cbor-7049bis-16, 30 September 2020,
	<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-cbor-		<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-cbor-
	7049bis-16.txt>.		7049bis-16.txt>.
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
	skipping to change at page 11, line 33 ¶		skipping to change at page 11, line 48 ¶
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
	[RFC6256] Eddy, W. and E. Davies, "Using Self-Delimiting Numeric		[RFC6256] Eddy, W. and E. Davies, "Using Self-Delimiting Numeric
	Values in Protocols", RFC 6256, DOI 10.17487/RFC6256, May		Values in Protocols", RFC 6256, DOI 10.17487/RFC6256, May
	2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6256>.		2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6256>.
	[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC		[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
	2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,		2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
	May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.		May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
			[RFC8610] Birkholz, H., Vigano, C., and C. Bormann, "Concise Data
			Definition Language (CDDL): A Notational Convention to
			Express Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) and
			JSON Data Structures", RFC 8610, DOI 10.17487/RFC8610,
			June 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8610>.
	[X.660] International Telecommunications Union, "Information		[X.660] International Telecommunications Union, "Information
	technology — Procedures for the operation of object		technology — Procedures for the operation of object
	identifier registration authorities: General procedures		identifier registration authorities: General procedures
	and top arcs of the international object identifier tree",		and top arcs of the international object identifier tree",
	ITU-T Recommendation X.660, July 2011.		ITU-T Recommendation X.660, July 2011.
	[X.680] International Telecommunications Union, "Information		[X.680] International Telecommunications Union, "Information
	technology — Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1):		technology — Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1):
	Specification of basic notation", ITU-T Recommendation		Specification of basic notation", ITU-T Recommendation
	X.680, August 2015.		X.680, August 2015.
	[X.690] International Telecommunications Union, "Information		[X.690] International Telecommunications Union, "Information
	technology — ASN.1 encoding rules: Specification of Basic		technology — ASN.1 encoding rules: Specification of Basic
	Encoding Rules (BER), Canonical Encoding Rules (CER) and		Encoding Rules (BER), Canonical Encoding Rules (CER) and
	Distinguished Encoding Rules (DER)", ITU-T Recommendation		Distinguished Encoding Rules (DER)", ITU-T Recommendation
	X.690, August 2015.		X.690, August 2015.
	10.2. Informative References		11.2. Informative References
	[OID-INFO] Orange SA, "OID Repository", 2016,		[OID-INFO] Orange SA, "OID Repository", 2016,
	<http://www.oid-info.com/>.		<http://www.oid-info.com/>.
	[PCRE] Ho, A., "PCRE - Perl Compatible Regular Expressions",		[PCRE] Ho, A., "PCRE - Perl Compatible Regular Expressions",
	2018, <http://www.pcre.org/>.		2018, <http://www.pcre.org/>.
	[RFC7388] Schoenwaelder, J., Sehgal, A., Tsou, T., and C. Zhou,		[RFC7388] Schoenwaelder, J., Sehgal, A., Tsou, T., and C. Zhou,
	"Definition of Managed Objects for IPv6 over Low-Power		"Definition of Managed Objects for IPv6 over Low-Power
	Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs)", RFC 7388,		Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs)", RFC 7388,
End of changes. 17 change blocks.
	26 lines changed or deleted		51 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/