draft-ietf-urn-rfc2611bis-03.txt   draft-ietf-urn-rfc2611bis-04.txt 
Internet-Draft L. Daigle Internet-Draft L. Daigle
URN WG Thinking Cat Enterprises URN WG Thinking Cat Enterprises
Expires November 7, 2001 D. van Gulik Expires July 13, 2002 D. van Gulik
Category: Best Current Practice WebWeaving Category: Best Current Practice WebWeaving
draft-ietf-urn-rfc2611bis-03.txt R. Iannella draft-ietf-urn-rfc2611bis-04.txt R. Iannella
IPR Systems IPR Systems
P. Faltstrom P. Faltstrom
Cisco Cisco
May 7, 2001 January 13, 2002
URN Namespace Definition Mechanisms URN Namespace Definition Mechanisms
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
skipping to change at page 1, line 34 skipping to change at page 1, line 35
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other
documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet- Drafts documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet- Drafts
as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in
progress." progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Abstract Abstract
The URN WG has defined a syntax for Uniform Resource Names (URNs) The URN WG has defined a syntax for Uniform Resource Names (URNs)
[RFC2141], as well as some proposed mechanisms for their resolution [RFC2141], as well as some proposed mechanisms for their resolution
and use in Internet applications ([RFCXXXX], [RFCYYYY]). The whole and use in Internet applications ([RFCXXXX], [RFCYYYY]). The whole
rests on the concept of individual "namespaces" within the URN rests on the concept of individual "namespaces" within the URN
structure. Apart from proof-of-concept namespaces, the use of structure. Apart from proof-of-concept namespaces, the use of
existing identifiers in URNs has been discussed ([RFC2288]), and this existing identifiers in URNs has been discussed ([RFC2288]), and this
document lays out general definitions of and mechanisms for document lays out general definitions of and mechanisms for
establishing URN "namespaces". establishing URN "namespaces".
This document obsoletes RFC2611. This document obsoletes RFC2611.
Discussion of this document should be directed to urn-ietf@ietf.org Discussion of this document should be directed to urn-ietf@ietf.org
Table of Contents Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................ Abstract ........................................................ 1
Table of Contents ............................................... Table of Contents ............................................... 2
1.0 Introduction ................................................ 1.0 Introduction ................................................ 2
2.0 What is a URN Namespace? .................................... 2.0 What is a URN Namespace? .................................... 3
3.0 URN Namespace (Registration) Types .......................... 3.0 URN Namespace (Registration) Types .......................... 4
3.1 Experimental Namespaces ..................................... 3.1 Experimental Namespaces ..................................... 4
3.2 Informal Namespaces ......................................... 3.2 Informal Namespaces ......................................... 4
3.3 Formal Namespaces ........................................... 3.3 Formal Namespaces ........................................... 4
4.0 URN Namespace Registration, Update, and NID Assignment 4.0 URN Namespace Registration, Update, and NID Assignment
Process ..................................................... Process ..................................................... 6
4.1 Experimental ................................................ 4.1 Experimental ................................................ 6
4.2 Informal .................................................... 4.2 Informal .................................................... 7
4.3 Formal ...................................................... 4.3 Formal ...................................................... 7
5.0 Security Considerations ..................................... 5.0 Security Considerations ..................................... 9
6.0 IANA Considerations ......................................... 6.0 IANA Considerations ......................................... 9
7.0 References .................................................. 7.0 References .................................................. 9
8.0 Authors' Addresses .......................................... 8.0 Authors' Addresses .......................................... 10
9.0 Appendix A -- URN Namespace Definition Template ............. 9.0 Appendix A -- URN Namespace Definition Template ............. 11
10.0 Appendix B -- Illustration ................................. 10.0 Appendix B -- Illustration ................................. 15
10.1 Example Template ........................................... 10.1 Example Template ........................................... 15
10.2 Registration steps in practice ............................. 10.2 Registration steps in practice ............................. 17
11.0 Appendix C -- Changes from RFC2611 ......................... 18
11.1 Detailed Document Changes .................................. 19
1.0 Introduction 1.0 Introduction
Uniform Resource Names (URNs) are resource identifiers with the Uniform Resource Names (URNs) are resource identifiers with the
specific requirements for enabling location independent specific requirements for enabling location independent
identification of a resource, as well as longevity of reference. identification of a resource, as well as longevity of reference.
There are 2 assumptions that are key to this document: There are 2 assumptions that are key to this document:
Assumption #1: Assumption #1:
skipping to change at page 10, line 4 skipping to change at page 10, line 5
(informal or formal), as described above, once an IESG-designated (informal or formal), as described above, once an IESG-designated
expert has confirmed that the requisite registration process steps expert has confirmed that the requisite registration process steps
have been completed. This document defines processes to replace have been completed. This document defines processes to replace
those outlined in [RFC2611]. those outlined in [RFC2611].
7.0 References 7.0 References
[ISO8601] ISO 8601 : 1988 (E), "Data elements and interchange [ISO8601] ISO 8601 : 1988 (E), "Data elements and interchange
formats - Information interchange - Representation of formats - Information interchange - Representation of
dates and times" dates and times"
[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
3", RFC 2026, October 1996. 3",
RFC 2026, October 1996.
[RFC2611] Daigle, L., D. van Gulik, R. Iannella, P. Faltstrom,
"URN Namespace Definition Mechanisms", RFC 2611,
June 1999.
[RFC2288] Lynch, C., Preston, C. and R. Daniel, "Using Existing [RFC2288] Lynch, C., Preston, C. and R. Daniel, "Using Existing
Bibliographic Identifiers as Uniform Resource Names", RFC Bibliographic Identifiers as Uniform Resource Names", RFC
2288, February 1998. 2288, February 1998.
[RFCXXXX] Mealling, M., "URI Resolution using the Dynamic [RFCXXXX] Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)
Delegation Discovery System", RFCXXXX. Part One: The Comprehensive DDDS Standard", RFC XXXX.
[RFCYYYY] Mealling, M., "Assignment Procedures for URI Resolution [RFCYYYY] Mealling, M., "Assignment Procedures for URI Resolution
Using DNS", RFCYYYY. Using DNS", RFCYYYY.
[RFC2141] Moats, R., "URN Syntax", RFC 2141, May 1997. [RFC2141] Moats, R., "URN Syntax", RFC 2141, May 1997.
[RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an [RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
October 1998. October 1998.
skipping to change at page 12, line 49 skipping to change at page 13, line 7
documentation that defines or explains all or part of the documentation that defines or explains all or part of the
namespace structure. namespace structure.
Answers might include, but are not limited to: Answers might include, but are not limited to:
- RFCs outlining syntax of the namespace - RFCs outlining syntax of the namespace
- Other of the defining community's (e.g., ISO) documents - Other of the defining community's (e.g., ISO) documents
outlining syntax of the identifiers in the namespace outlining syntax of the identifiers in the namespace
- Explanatory material introducing the namespace - Explanatory material introducing the namespace
Identifier uniqueness considerations: This section should address the Identifier uniqueness considerations:
requirement that URN identifiers be assigned uniquely -- they are
assigned to at most one resource, and are not reassigned. This section should address the requirement that URN identifiers be
assigned uniquely -- they are assigned to at most one resource, and
are not reassigned.
(Note that the definition of "resource" is fairly broad; for example, (Note that the definition of "resource" is fairly broad; for example,
information on "Today's Weather" might be considered a single information on "Today's Weather" might be considered a single
resource, although the content is dynamic.) resource, although the content is dynamic.)
Possible answers include, but are not limited to: Possible answers include, but are not limited to:
- exposition of the structure of the identifiers, and partitioning - exposition of the structure of the identifiers, and partitioning
of the space of identifiers amongst assignment authorities which of the space of identifiers amongst assignment authorities which
are individually responsible for respecting uniqueness rules are individually responsible for respecting uniqueness rules
skipping to change at page 14, line 42 skipping to change at page 15, line 4
Conformance with URN Syntax: Conformance with URN Syntax:
This section should outline any special considerations required This section should outline any special considerations required
for conforming with the URN syntax. This is particularly for conforming with the URN syntax. This is particularly
applicable in the case of legacy naming systems that are used in applicable in the case of legacy naming systems that are used in
the context of URNs. the context of URNs.
For example, if a namespace is used in contexts other than URNs, For example, if a namespace is used in contexts other than URNs,
it may make use of characters that are reserved in the URN syntax. it may make use of characters that are reserved in the URN syntax.
This section should flag any such characters, and outline This section should flag any such characters, and outline
necessary mappings to conform to URN syntax. Normally, this will necessary mappings to conform to URN syntax. Normally, this will
be handled by hex encoding the symbol. be handled by hex encoding the symbol.
For example, see the section on SICIs in [RFC2288]. For example, see the section on SICIs in [RFC2288].
Validation mechanism: Validation mechanism:
Apart from attempting resolution of a URN, a URN namespace may Apart from attempting resolution of a URN, a URN namespace may
provide mechanism for "validating" a URN -- i.e., determining provide mechanism for "validating" a URN -- i.e., determining whether
whether a given string is currently a validly-assigned URN. a given string is currently a validly-assigned URN. There are 2
There are 2 issues here: 1) users should not "guess" URNs in a issues here: 1) users should not "guess" URNs in a namespace; 2) when
namespace; 2) when the URN namespace is based on an existing the URN namespace is based on an existing identifier system, it may
identifier system, it may not be the case that all the existing not be the case that all the existing identifiers are assigned on Day
identifiers are assigned on Day 0. The reasonable expectation is 0. The reasonable expectation is that the resource associated with
that the each resulting URN is somehow related to the thing identified by the
resource associated with each resulting URN is somehow related to original identifier system, but those resources may not exist for
the each original identifier. For example, even if a telephone number-
thing identified by the original identifier system, but those based URN namespace was created, it is not clear that all telephone
resources may not exist for each original identifier. For numbers would immediately become "valid" URNs, that could be resolved
example, even if a telephone number-based URN namespace was using whatever mechanisms are described as part of the namespace
created, registration.
it is not clear that all telephone numbers would immediately
become
"valid" URNs, that could be resolved using whatever mechanisms
are described as part of the namespace registration.
A validation mechanims might be: A validation mechanims might be:
- a syntax grammar - a syntax grammar
- an on-line service - an on-line service
- an off-line service - an off-line service
Scope: Scope:
This section should outline the scope of the use of the This section should outline the scope of the use of the
skipping to change at line 832 skipping to change at page 18, line 42
3. Update the Internet-Draft as necessary from comments, and repeat 3. Update the Internet-Draft as necessary from comments, and repeat
steps 2 and 3 as needed. steps 2 and 3 as needed.
4. Send a request to the IESG to publish the I-D as an RFC. The 4. Send a request to the IESG to publish the I-D as an RFC. The
IESG may request further changes (published as I-D revisions) IESG may request further changes (published as I-D revisions)
and/or direct discussion to designated working groups, area and/or direct discussion to designated working groups, area
experts, etc. experts, etc.
5. If the IESG approves the document for publication as an RFC, 5. If the IESG approves the document for publication as an RFC,
send a request to IANA to register the requested NID. send a request to IANA to register the requested NID.
11.0 Appendix C -- Changes from RFC2611
This revision of [RFC2611] adds more detail describing the process of
registering a URN namespace identifier (in terms of mechanical
steps).
This version of the document also separates the process (mechanics)
from the discussion of the requirements for namespaces, attempting to
make the latter as objective as possible.
Throughout the document, references have been updated to the current
versions of the DDDS and related documentation (which collectively
obsolete [RFC2168] and related drafts).
11.1 Detailed Document Changes
Added table of contents
Section 2
Clarified the definition of a URN namespace, uniqueness of
assignment, and that a single resource may have more than one
identifier associated with it.
Clarified the "number example" -- that the same string may appear in
2 different namespaces, and be applied to different resources.
Originally used ISBN/ISSN example, but structurally this is not
possible.
Section 3 (new)
This section explicitly defines the 3 categories of namespace --
Experimental, Informal and Formal. This section provides a
description of the intended use of the different namespace types, as
well as some acceptability guidelines for Formal namespaces (which
require IETF review).
Section 4.0
Spelled out the name of RFC2434 ("IANA Considerations").
Provided a pointer to the IANA URN namespace registry.
Sections 4.1-4.3 new subsection divisions of the existing discussion
of individual namespace types.
Section 4.2
Corrected reference to URN Syntax document (RFC2141, not RFC2168).
Section 4.3
Added clarifying text as to the intended nature of Formal namespaces
and processes for registering them.
Added text to describe the requirement for a "Namespace
Considerations" section in RFCs defining Formal namespaces. Defined
the required content of that section.
Added text to describe the new requirement for a "Community
Considerations" section in RFCs defining Formal namespaces. Defined
the required content of that section.
Added text to explicitly call out the need for an "IANA
Considerations" section in such RFCs, in order to alert IANA to
required action.
Added text to further clarify the (IETF) process for revising Formal
namespace registrations through the RFC and IETF review process.
Section 6
New section -- added text to describe the IANA considerations for
this document.
Section 7 -- References
Added references to revised NAPTR documentation ([RFCXXXX]), and the
previous version of this document ([RFC2611]).
Section 9 -- Appendix A
section created by moving the "URN Namespace Definition Template"
(RFC2611's Section 3) to an appendix.
Added references to the new requirements for "Namespace
Considerations", "Community Considerations", and "IANA
Considerations" sections for Formal namespace registrations.
Clarified the "Declared registrant of the namespace" template
element.
Added text to describe the purpose and scope of the "Validating
Mechanism".
Section 10 -- Appendix B
Section 10.1 is the "example template" that was "Section 5" in
RFC2611.
Update the sample "declared registrant" data per the changes to the
template description.
Removed the reference to "US-ASCII" in the "namespace specific
string" of the example namespace.
Section 10.2 (new)
This added section is a step-by-step walkthrough of the process for
registering Informal namespaces and Formal namespaces.
 End of changes. 14 change blocks. 
47 lines changed or deleted 55 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.34. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/