Registration
Authorities
for OID components
Protocols need to carry
names!
|
|
|
Generic carrier protocols need names
for their contents |
|
Directory (X.500) protocols need names
for things they are trying to access |
|
E-mail (X.400) protocols need names for
originator and recipient names |
Historical contributions
to the naming problem
|
|
|
One of the first attempts at a naming
standard for data communication was X.121, used in X.25. |
|
32-bit Ethernet name allocation was
another important piece of standardisation. |
|
Network Service Access Point addresses
in OSI (NSAP addresses) made an important contribution. |
|
ASN.1 definition of the Object
Identifier Tree in about 1986 was a seminal contribution. |
|
UUID naming mechanisms developed in the
1990s introduced new concepts to naming. |
Hierarchical v Central
|
|
|
I'm the Registration Authority, and
that's it (the Monolithic Approach). |
|
I will do my bit, you can add to
it
(the Hierarchical Approach). |
|
Let's use as much as possible of
existing naming
(the Pragmatic Approach). |
|
Marriages, marriages, marriages. |
|
For example, ISO Biometrics work uses a
centralised registration authority (Monolithic Approach), but has an Annex
that formally defines its allocations as part of an ASN.1 OID (Hierachical
Approach) |
Character versus binary
naming
|
|
|
Character versus binary protocols
remains an area of contention – preferred naming often follows this decision. |
|
Current work on "Fast Web
Services" in ITU-T can be stated as "binary encodings for Web
Services exchanges" |
|
Fast Web Services may or may not gain
acceptance against XML (character-based) encodings for Web Services, but it
is a fight worth fighting! Please fight! |
|
Historically, ITU-T (CCITT before it)
has backed both binary *and* character-based naming horses. |
ASN.1 grasped the nettle
|
|
|
|
The easy bit: |
|
Combine the Hierarchical Approach and
the Pragmatic approach |
|
The hard bit: |
|
Long character strings versus obscure
binary representations |
|
A lot of blood was spilled in 1985. |
|
Went for binary!!!! (In the encoding,
characters in the value notation – see later) |
|
OIDs are essentially binary encodings. |
|
Even when sent with XML they are
things
like 0.2.693.57. etc – encoded in characters, but it is still binary! |
Notation for OID values –
human-readable
|
|
|
Early notation for OID values
(allocations) looked like: |
|
{iso standard 8571 etc} |
|
SNMP started the rot: use simply a character representation of
the encoding: 1.0.8571.etc for human
consumption. |
|
The change from "ccitt" to
"itu-t" in
"joint-iso-ccitt" also caused problems. |
|
The numeric form is now accepted as
valid notation. |
|
Names are now regarded as not
normative. |
X.400 and X.500
|
|
|
X.500 went for what became called
"long-names" – character-based. |
|
X.400 used both forms! (Differed a bit
in the 1984 vs. 1988 versions) |
|
Major fight on introduction of "short-names" into
X.500 around 1988ish |
|
Accepted, but never really took off or
implemented. Today, X.500
distinguished names are not considered "long" – compared, for
example with Certificate Revocation Lists (CRLs). |
Navigating the tree
|
|
|
X.500 also added the concept that a
sub-arc might be identified by a pair of values (for example, organisational
unit and location), rather than just by a single value. |
|
This is the principal difference (apart
from character v binary representation) between the X.500 use of the RH-name
tree concept and the ASN.1 use of the RH-name tree concept for the Object
Identifier tree. |
Moving to the Web
|
|
|
Publication of naming allocations on
the Web is increasingly common but adds cost for an RA. |
|
The ITU-T OID description database is
an excellent example, with over 50,000 entries. |
|
OID repository: http://oid.elibel.tm.fr |
|
Automatic allocations (possibly using
Fast Web Services protocols) reduces the cost of running an RA. |
|
First done by IANA for ASN.1 OID
components for SNMP. |
ASN.1 Project and ITU-T
support
|
|
|
We live in interesting times! |
|
An immense amount done already on the
module database and the OID registry. |
|
Suggestions for automatic machine
access to ASN.1 modules from the database – Sun Microsystems involvement,
tool vendor agreement to provide clients. |
|
Suggestions for automatic registration
of UUID values for an OID component (see later). |
Enough of history and
futures – what of the NOW?
|
|
|
The revised X.660 and X.670 series
Recommendations are just that – revisions. |
|
Incorporate amendments, update tables
and lists, and improve editorial clarity. |
|
Don't bother to read them! |
What are these
Recommendations?
(Yuck, he's getting serious – time to walk out to my
main meeting!)
|
|
|
Sorry folks, but one slide per
Recommendation (could just be two or three for some!). |
|
I owe that to the authors that spent a
lot of time on the original work. |
|
Walk out if you like, but this is the
guts of the presentation. |
General contents
|
|
|
(Sometimes) provides information on
Registration Hierarchical name trees. |
|
Usually specifies procedures for the
operation of a Registration Authority. |
|
Mainly defines procedures for
allocation under a specific ASN.1 Object Identifier arc. |
|
Revision makes no real technical
changes – incorporates amendments, changes CCITT to ITU-T, clarifies, etc. |
|
Makes UPU legitimate! |
X.660 (ISO/IEC 9834-1)
|
|
|
Title: INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY – OPEN
SYSTEMS INTERCONNECTION –
PROCEDURES FOR THE OPERATION
OF OSI REGISTRATION AUTHORITIES: GENERAL
PROCEDURES |
|
A bad title! Still not quite settled! |
|
This describes the RH-Name tree, and
specifies general procedures for registration authorities in this area. |
|
These procedures are referenced from
other parts of the series. |
No X.661 (ISO/IEC 9834-2)
|
|
|
FTAM Document type registration. |
|
Many registrations within the ISO
profiles work. |
|
ISO work never supported by ITU-T. |
|
Will not be revised, and not of
interest. |
|
|
X.662 (ISO/IEC 9834-3)
|
|
|
Title: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY – OPEN SYSTEMS
INTERCONNECTION – PROCEDURES FOR THE OPERATION OF
OSI REGISTRATION
AUTHORITIES: REGISTRATION OF
ASN.1 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ARCS FOR
JOINT ISO AND
ITU-T WORK |
|
This is an important Recommendation |
|
Provides the Registration of areas of
joint work with ITU-T and ISO. |
|
About 25 current allocations. |
|
ANSI remains the Registration
Authority. |
|
Simple resolution from SG17 and SC6. |
|
|
No X.663 (ISO/IEC 9834-4)
|
|
|
VT profile registration. |
|
Many registrations within the ISO
profiles work. |
|
ISO work never supported by ITU-T. |
|
Will not be revised, and not of
interest. |
No X.664 (ISO/IEC 9834-5)
|
|
|
VT control object registration. |
|
Many registrations within the ISO
profiles work. |
|
ISO work never supported by ITU-T. |
|
Will not be revised, and not of
interest. |
X.665 (ISO/IEC 9834-6)
|
|
|
Title: INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY – OPEN
SYSTEMS INTERCONNECTION –
PROCEDURES FOR THE OPERATION
OF OSI REGISTRATION AUTHORITIES: APPLICATION PROCESSES AND APPLICATION ENTITIES |
|
Joint with ISO. |
|
Will be formally revised, but defunct
and not of interest. |
X.666 (ISO/IEC 9834-7)
|
|
|
Title: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY – OPEN SYSTEMS
INTERCONNECTION – PROCEDURES FOR THE OPERATION OF
OSI REGISTRATION
AUTHORITIES: JOINT ISO AND ITU-T
REGISTRATION OF INTERNATIONAL
ORGANIZATIONS |
|
This is one of two Recommendations for
registration of International Organizations (see X.669 later). |
|
Registers international organisations
under the ASN.1 joint ITU-T and ISO "international-organisation"
arcs, but also defines X.500 and
X.400 naming of International Organisations |
|
For X.400 it defines the PRMD and ADMD
concepts. |
X.667 (ISO/IEC 9834-8)
|
|
|
Title: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY – OPEN SYSTEMS
INTERCONNECTION – PROCEDURES FOR THE OPERATION OF
OSI REGISTRATION
AUTHORITIES: GENERATION AND
REGISTRATION OF UNIVERSALLY UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS (UUIDS) |
|
This is an important new
Recommendation, for approval at the March 2004 meeting of SG17. |
|
The history of UUID (GUID) work is
worth several slides on its own! |
|
It involves Microsoft, IETF Draft RFCs
and the Open Group. |
Wow! A second slide!
|
|
|
UUIDs are extremely widely used, but
with no standard specifying them! |
|
They are used in Bluetooth
specifications and in ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC37 BioAPI and CBEFF specifications (probably many others). |
|
References in the ISO work rely on this
Recommendation | International Standard |
And a third!
|
|
|
UUIDs are quite big – 16 octets. |
|
They can be self-allocated on a
transient basis that guarantees uniqueness up to AD 3400, with allocations of
up to 10 million per second. |
|
They can also be allocated for
permanent identification. |
|
Registration is not required, but
reduces probable uniqueness from 99% certain to 100% certain. |
|
Can be used as ASN.1 OID components. |
Not X.668 (Not ISO/IEC
9834-9)
|
|
|
The one that got away. |
|
Proposed as the RA Standard for
Biometric Registration. |
|
X.600 series had a lot to offer, and
much text from that series is being used. |
|
But decided to proceed with pure
ISO/SC37 Standard, as a second part of CBEFF. |
|
Pity, but we tried! |
X.669
|
|
|
Title: INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY – OPEN
SYSTEMS INTERCONNECTION –
PROCEDURES FOR THE OPERATION
OF OSI REGISTRATION AUTHORITIES: ITU-T REGISTRATION OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
REGISTRATION |
|
This is one of two Recommendations for
registration of International Organizations. |
|
This registers under the ITU-T arc to
ITU-T Members. |
|
The other (X.666) registers
organisations under the joint ISO/ITU-T arc. |
|
For totally historical reasons, this is
quite different from X.666 text.
X.666 is probably the more important and better text. |
X.670
|
|
|
Title: PROCEDURES FOR REGISTRATION AGENTS OPERATING ON BEHALF OF
ORGANIZATIONS TO REGISTER ORGANIZATION NAMES SUBORDINATE TO COUNTRY NAMES. |
|
This is a Recommendation for software
to register International Organizations under multiple countries (see X.671). |
|
It is believed that neither this
Recommendation nor X.671 has been implemented, and revision is a formality to
ensure coherence of the series. |
X.671
|
|
|
Title: PROCEDURES FOR A REGISTRATION AUTHORITY OPERATING ON BEHALF OF
COUNTRIES TO REGISTER ORGANIZATION NAMES SUBORDINATE TO COUNTRY NAMES. |
|
This is a Recommendation for the
operation of a Registration Authority in a country to register International
Organization names under that country name (see also X.670). |
|
It is believed that neither this
Recommendation nor X.670 has been implemented, and revision is a formality to
ensure coherence of the series. |
If you have lasted this
far, you have been very patient