Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) J. Arkko
Request for Comments: 9039 Ericsson
Category: Standards Track C. Jennings
ISSN: 2070-1721 Cisco
Z. Shelby
ARM
May
Edge Impulse
June 2021
Uniform Resource Names for Device Identifiers
Abstract
This document describes a new Uniform Resource Name (URN) namespace
for hardware device identifiers. A general representation of device
identity can be useful in many applications, such as in sensor data
streams and storage or in equipment inventories. A URN-based
representation can be passed along in applications that need the
information.
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9039.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Requirements Language
3. DEV URN Definition
3.1. Purpose
3.2. Syntax
3.2.1. Character Case and URN-Equivalence
3.3. Assignment
3.4. Security and Privacy
3.5. Interoperability
3.6. Resolution
3.7. Documentation
3.8. Additional Information
3.9. Revision Information
4. DEV URN Subtypes
4.1. MAC Addresses
4.2. 1-Wire Device Identifiers
4.3. Organization-Defined Identifiers
4.4. Organization Serial Numbers
4.5. Organization Product and Serial Numbers
4.6. Future Subtypes
5. Examples
6. Security Considerations
6.1. Privacy
6.2. Validity
7. IANA Considerations
8. References
8.1. Normative References
8.2. Informative References
Acknowledgments
Authors' Addresses
1. Introduction
This document describes a new Uniform Resource Name (URN) [RFC8141]
namespace for hardware device identifiers. A general representation
of device identity can be useful in many applications, such as in
sensor data streams and storage [RFC8428] or in equipment inventories [RFC7252]
[RFC8428] [CoRE-RD].
A URN-based representation can be passed along in applications that
need the information. It fits particularly well for protocols
mechanisms that are designed to carry URNs [RFC7230] [RFC7540]
[RFC3261] [RFC7252]. Finally, URNs can also be easily carried and
stored in formats such as XML [W3C.REC-xml-19980210], JSON [RFC8259],
or SenML [RFC8428]. Using URNs in these formats is often preferable
as they are universally recognized and self-describing and therefore
avoid the need to agree to interpret an octet string as a specific
form of a Media Access Control (MAC) address, for instance. Passing
URNs may consume additional bytes compared to, for instance, passing
4-byte binary IPv4 addresses, but the former offers some flexibility
in return.
This document defines identifier URN types for situations where no
such convenient type already exists. For instance, [RFC6920] defines
cryptographic identifiers, [RFC7254] defines International Mobile
station Equipment Identity (IMEI) identifiers for use with 3GPP
cellular systems, and [RFC8464] defines Mobile Equipment Identity
(MEID) identifiers for use with 3GPP2 cellular systems. Those URN
types should be employed when such identifiers are transported; this
document does not redefine these identifiers in any way.
Universally Unique Identifier (UUID) URNs [RFC4122] are another
alternative way to represent device identifiers and already support
MAC addresses as one type of identifier. However, UUIDs can be
inconvenient in environments where it is important that the
identifiers be as simple as possible and where additional
requirements on stable storage, real-time clocks, and identifier
length can be prohibitive. Often, UUID-based identifiers are
preferred for general purpose uses instead of the MAC-based device
URNs defined in this document. The device URNs are recommended for
constrained environments.
Future device identifier types can extend the device URN type defined
in this document (see Section 7), or they can define their own URNs.
Note that long-term stable unique identifiers are problematic for
privacy reasons and should be used with care as described in
[RFC7721].
The rest of this document is organized as follows. Section 3 defines
the "DEV" URN type, and Section 4 defines subtypes for IEEE MAC-48,
EUI-48 and EUI-64 addresses, and 1-Wire device identifiers.
Section 5 gives examples. Section 6 discusses the security and
privacy considerations of the new URN type. Finally, Section 7
specifies the IANA registration for the new URN type and sets
requirements for subtype allocations within this type.
2. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
3. DEV URN Definition
Namespace Identifier: "dev"
Version: 1
Date: 2020-06-24
Registrant: IETF and the CORE Working Group. Should the working
group cease to exist, discussion should be directed to the
application area
Applications and Real-Time Area or general IETF discussion forums,
or the IESG.
3.1. Purpose
The DEV URNs identify devices with device-specific identifiers such
as network card hardware addresses. DEV URNs are scoped to be
globally applicable (see [RFC8141], Section 6.4.1) and, in general,
enable systems to use these identifiers from multiple sources in an
interoperable manner. Note that in some deployments, ensuring
uniqueness requires care if manual or local assignment mechanisms are
used, as discussed in Section 3.3.
Some typical DEV URN applications include equipment inventories and
smart object systems.
DEV URNs can be used in various ways in applications, software
systems, and network components, in tasks ranging from discovery (for
instance, when discovering 1-Wire network devices or detecting MAC-
addressable devices on a LAN) to intrusion detection systems and
simple catalogues of system information.
While it is possible to implement resolution systems for specific
applications or network locations, DEV URNs are typically not used in
a way that requires resolution beyond direct observation of the
relevant identifier fields in local link communication. However, it
is often useful to be able to pass device identifier information in
generic URN fields in databases or protocol fields, which makes the
use of URNs for this purpose convenient.
The DEV URN namespace complements existing namespaces such as those
involving IMEI or UUID identifiers. DEV URNs are expected to be a
part of the IETF-provided basic URN types, covering identifiers that
have previously not been possible to use in URNs.
3.2. Syntax
The identifier is expressed in ASCII characters and has a
hierarchical structure as follows:
devurn = "urn:dev:" body componentpart
body = macbody / owbody / orgbody / osbody / opsbody / otherbody
macbody = %s"mac:" hexstring
owbody = %s"ow:" hexstring
orgbody = %s"org:" posnumber "-" identifier *( ":" identifier )
osbody = %s"os:" posnumber "-" serial *( ":" identifier )
opsbody = %s"ops:" posnumber "-" product "-" serial
*( ":" identifier )
otherbody = subtype ":" identifier *( ":" identifier )
subtype = LALPHA *(DIGIT / LALPHA)
identifier = 1*devunreserved
identifiernodash = 1*devunreservednodash
product = identifiernodash
serial = identifier
componentpart = *( "_" identifier )
devunreservednodash = ALPHA / DIGIT / "."
devunreserved = devunreservednodash / "-"
hexstring = 1*(hexdigit hexdigit)
hexdigit = DIGIT / "a" / "b" / "c" / "d" / "e" / "f"
posnumber = NZDIGIT *DIGIT
ALPHA = %x41-5A / %x61-7A
LALPHA = %x41-5A
NZDIGIT = %x31-39
DIGIT = %x30-39
The above syntax is represented in Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF)
as defined in [RFC5234] and [RFC7405]. The syntax also copies the
DIGIT and ALPHA rules originally defined in [RFC5234], exactly as
defined there.
The device identifier namespace includes five subtypes (see
Section 4), and more may be defined in the future as specified in
Section 7.
The optional underscore-separated components at the end of the DEV
URN depict individual aspects of a device. The specific strings and
their semantics are up to the designers of the device but could be
used to refer to specific interfaces or functions within the device.
With the exception of the MAC address and 1-Wire DEV URNs, each DEV
URN may also contain optional colon-separated identifiers. These are
provided for extensibility.
There are no special character encoding rules or considerations for
conforming with the URN syntax beyond those applicable for URNs in
general [RFC8141] or the context where these URNs are carried (e.g.,
inside JSON [RFC8259] or SenML [RFC8428]). Due to the SenML rules in
[RFC8428], Section 4.5.1, it is not desirable to use percent-encoding
in DEV URNs, and the subtypes defined in this specification do not
really benefit from percent-encoding. However, this specification
does not deviate from the general syntax of URNs or their processing
and normalization rules as specified in [RFC3986] and [RFC8141].
DEV URNs do not use r-, q-, or f-components as defined in [RFC8141].
Specific subtypes of DEV URNs may be validated through mechanisms
discussed in Section 4.
The string representation of the device identifier URN is fully
compatible with the URN syntax.
3.2.1. Character Case and URN-Equivalence
The DEV URN syntax allows both uppercase and lowercase characters.
The URN-equivalence of the DEV URNs is defined per [RFC8141],
Section 3.1, i.e., two URNs are URN-equivalent if their assigned-name
portions are octet-by-octet equal after applying case normalization
to the URI scheme ("urn") and namespace identifier ("dev"). The rest
of the DEV URN is compared in a case-sensitive manner. It should be
noted that URN-equivalence matching merely quickly shows that two
URNs are definitely the same for the purposes of caching and other
similar uses. Two DEV URNs may still refer to the same entity and
may not be found to be URN-equivalent according to the [RFC8141]
definition. For instance, in ABNF, strings are case insensitive (see
[RFC5234], Section 2.3), and a MAC address could be represented
either with uppercase or lowercase hexadecimal digits.
Character case is not otherwise significant for the DEV URN subtypes
defined in this document. However, future subtypes might include
identifiers that use encodings such as base64, which encodes strings
in a larger variety of characters and might even encode binary data.
To facilitate equivalence checks, it is RECOMMENDED that
implementations always use lowercase letters where they have a choice
in case, unless there is a reason otherwise. (Such a reason might
be, for instance, the use of a subtype that requires the use of both
uppercase and lowercase letters.)
3.3. Assignment
The process for identifier assignment is dependent on the used
subtype and is documented in the specific subsection under Section 4.
Device identifiers are generally expected to identify a unique
device, barring the accidental issue of multiple devices with the
same identifiers. In many cases, device identifiers can also be
changed by users or are sometimes assigned in an algorithmic or local
fashion. Any potential conflicts arising from such assignments are
not something that the DEV URNs as such manage; they simply are there
to refer to a particular identifier. And, of course, a single device
may (and often does) have multiple identifiers, e.g., identifiers
associated with different link technologies it supports.
The DEV URN type SHOULD only be used for hardware-based identifiers
that are expected to be persistent (with some limits, as discussed
above).
3.4. Security and Privacy
As discussed in Section 6, care must be taken in the use of device-
identifier-based identifiers due to their nature as long-term
identifiers that are not normally changeable. Leakage of these
identifiers outside systems where their use is justified should be
controlled.
3.5. Interoperability
There are no specific interoperability concerns.
3.6. Resolution
The device identifiers are not expected to be globally resolvable.
No identifier resolution system is expected. Systems may perform
local matching of identifiers to previously seen identifiers or
configured information, however.
3.7. Documentation
See RFC 9039.
3.8. Additional Information
See Section 1 for a discussion of related namespaces.
3.9. Revision Information
This is the first version of this registration.
4. DEV URN Subtypes
4.1. MAC Addresses
DEV URNs of the "mac" subtype are based on the EUI-64 identifier
[IEEE.EUI64] derived from a device with a built-in 64-bit EUI-64.
The EUI-64 is formed from 24 or 36 bits of organization identifier
followed by 40 or 28 bits of device-specific extension identifier
assigned by that organization.
In the DEV URN "mac" subtype, the hexstring is simply the full EUI-64
identifier represented as a hexadecimal string. It is always exactly
16 characters long.
MAC-48 and EUI-48 identifiers are also supported by the same DEV URN
subtype. To convert a MAC-48 address to an EUI-64 identifier, the
Organizationally Unique Identifier (OUI) of the MAC-48 address (the
first three octets) becomes the organization identifier of the EUI-64
(the first three octets). The fourth and fifth octets of the EUI are
set to the fixed value 0xffff (hexadecimal). The last three octets
of the MAC-48 address become the last three octets of the EUI-64.
The same process is used to convert an EUI-48 identifier, but the
fixed value 0xfffe is used instead.
Identifier assignment for all of these identifiers rests within the
IEEE Registration Authority.
Note that where randomized MAC addresses are used, the resulting DEV
URNs cannot be expected to have uniqueness, as discussed in
Section 3.3.
4.2. 1-Wire Device Identifiers
The 1-Wire system is a device communications bus system designed by
Dallas Semiconductor Corporation. (1-Wire is a registered trademark.)
1-Wire devices are identified by a 64-bit identifier that consists of
an 8-bit family code, a 48-bit identifier unique within a family, and
an 8-bit Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC) code [OW].
In DEV URNs with the "ow" subtype, the hexstring is a representation
of the full 64-bit identifier as a hexadecimal string. It is always
exactly 16 characters long. Note that the last two characters
represent the 8-bit CRC code. Implementations MAY check the validity
of this code.
Family code and identifier assignment for all 1-Wire devices rests
with the manufacturers.
4.3. Organization-Defined Identifiers
Device identifiers that have only a meaning within an organization
can also be used to represent vendor-specific or experimental
identifiers or identifiers designed for use within the context of an
organization.
Organizations are identified by their Private Enterprise Number (PEN)
[RFC2578]. These numbers can be obtained from IANA. Current PEN
assignments can be viewed at <https://www.iana.org/assignments/
enterprise-numbers/enterprise-numbers>, and new assignments are
requested at <https://pen.iana.org/pen/PenApplication.page>.
Note that when included in an "org" DEV URN, the number cannot be
zero or have leading zeroes, as the ABNF requires the number to start
with a non-zero digit.
4.4. Organization Serial Numbers
The "os" subtype specifies an organization and serial number.
Organizations are identified by their PEN. As with the organization-
defined identifiers (Section 4.3), PEN number assignments are
maintained by IANA, and assignments for new organizations can be made
easily.
| Historical note: The "os" subtype was originally defined in the
| Open Mobile Alliance "Lightweight Machine to Machine" standard
| [LwM2M] but has been incorporated here to collect all syntaxes
| associated with DEV URNs in one place. At the same time, the
| syntax of this subtype was changed to avoid the possibility of
| characters that are not allowed in the SenML Name field (see
| [RFC8428], Section 4.5.1).
Organization serial number DEV URNs consist of the PEN number and the
serial number. As with other DEV URNs, for carrying additional
information and extensibility, optional colon-separated identifiers
and underscore-separated components may also be included. The serial
numbers themselves are defined by the organization, and this
specification does not specify how they are allocated.
Organizations are also encouraged to select serial number formats
that avoid the possibility of ambiguity in the form of leading zeroes
or otherwise.
4.5. Organization Product and Serial Numbers
The DEV URN "ops" subtype was originally defined in the LwM2M
standard but has been incorporated here to collect all syntaxes
associated with DEV URNs in one place. The "ops" subtype specifies
an organization, product class, and a serial number. Organizations
are identified by their PEN. Again, as with the organization-defined
identifiers (Section 4.3), PEN number assignments are maintained by
IANA.
| Historical note: As with the "os" subtype, the "ops" subtype
| was originally defined in OMA. the Open Mobile Alliance "Lightweight
| Machine to Machine" standard [LwM2M].
Organization product and serial number DEV URNs consist of the PEN
number, product class, and the serial number. As with other DEV
URNs, for carrying additional information and extensibility, optional
colon-separated identifiers and underscore-separated components may
also be included. Both the product class and serial numbers
themselves are defined by the organization, and this specification
does not specify how they are allocated.
Organizations are also encouraged to select product and serial number
formats that avoid possibility for ambiguity.
4.6. Future Subtypes
Additional subtypes may be defined in future specifications. See
Section 7.
The DEV URN "example" subtype is reserved for use in examples. It
has no specific requirements beyond those expressed by the ABNF in
Section 3.2.
5. Examples
The following provides some examples of DEV URNs:
+=========================================+=========================+
| URN | Description |
+=========================================+=========================+
| urn:dev:mac:0024beffff804ff1 # | The MAC-48 address of
# |
| | 0024be804ff1, |
| | converted
# to EUI-64 |
| | format |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| urn:dev:mac:0024befffe804ff1 # | The EUI-48 address of
# |
| | 0024be804ff1, |
| | converted
# to EUI-64 |
| | format |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| urn:dev:mac:acde48234567019f # | The EUI-64 address of
# |
| | acde48234567019f |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| urn:dev:ow:10e2073a01080063 # | A 1-Wire temperature
# |
| | sensor |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| urn:dev:ow:264437f5000000ed_humidity # | The humidity
# part of |
| | a multi-sensor
# device |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| urn:dev:ow:264437f5000000ed_temperature # | The temperature
# part |
| | of a multi-sensor
# |
| | device |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| urn:dev:org:32473-foo # | An organization-
# |
| | specific URN in the
# |
| | example organization
# |
| | 32473 in RFC 5612 [RFC5612] |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| urn:dev:os:32473-123456 # | Device 123456 in the
# |
| | example organization
# |
| | in RFC 5612 [RFC5612] |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| urn:dev:os:32473-12-34-56 # | A serial number with
# |
| | dashes in it |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| urn:dev:ops:32473-Refrigerator-5002 # | Refrigerator serial
# |
| | number 5002 in the
# |
| | example organization
# |
| | in RFC 5612 [RFC5612] |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| urn:dev:example:new-1-2-3_comp # | An example of |
| | something
# that is not |
| | defined today,
# and is |
| | not one of the
# mac, |
| | ow, os, or ops
# |
| | subtypes |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
Table 1
The DEV URNs themselves can then appear in various contexts. A
simple example of this is the use of DEV URNs in SenML data. This
example from [RFC8428] shows a measurement from a 1-Wire temperature
gauge encoded in the JSON syntax:
[
{"n":"urn:dev:ow:10e2073a01080063","u":"Cel","v":23.1}
]
6. Security Considerations
On most devices, the user can display device identifiers. Depending
on circumstances, device identifiers may or may not be modified or
tampered with by the user. An implementation of the DEV URN MUST
preserve such limitations and behaviors associated with the device
identifiers. In particular, a device identifier that is intended to
be immutable should not become mutable as a part of implementing the
DEV URN type. More generally, nothing in this document should be
construed to override what the relevant device specifications have
already said about the identifiers.
6.1. Privacy
Other devices in the same network may or may not be able to identify
the device. For instance, on an Ethernet network, the MAC address of
a device is visible to all other devices.
DEV URNs often represent long-term stable unique identifiers for
devices. Such identifiers may have privacy and security implications
because they may enable correlating information about a specific
device over a long period of time, location tracking, and device-
specific vulnerability exploitation [RFC7721]. Also, in some
systems, there is no easy way to change the identifier. Therefore,
these identifiers need to be used with care, and special care should
be taken to avoid leaking identifiers outside of the system that is
intended to use them.
6.2. Validity
Information about identifiers may have significant effects in some
applications. For instance, in many sensor systems, the identifier
information is used for deciding how to use the data carried in a
measurement report. In some other systems, identifiers may be used
in policy decisions.
It is important that systems be designed to take into account the
possibility of devices reporting incorrect identifiers (either
accidentally or maliciously) and the manipulation of identifiers in
communications by illegitimate entities. Integrity protection of
communications or data objects, the use of trusted devices, and
various management practices can help address these issues.
The
Similar to the advice from in [RFC4122], Section 6 also applies: 6: Do not assume that DEV
URNs are hard to guess.
7. IANA Considerations
Per this document, IANA has registered a new URN namespace for "dev",
as described in Section 3.
IANA has created a "DEV URN Subtypes" registry under "Device
Identification". The initial values in this registry are as follows:
+=========+===========================+=======================+
| Subtype | Description | Reference |
+=========+===========================+=======================+
| mac | MAC Addresses | RFC 9039, Section 4.1 |
+---------+---------------------------+-----------------------+
| ow | 1-Wire Device Identifiers | RFC 9039, Section 4.2 |
+---------+---------------------------+-----------------------+
| org | Organization-Defined | RFC 9039, Section 4.3 |
| | Identifiers | |
+---------+---------------------------+-----------------------+
| os | Organization Serial | RFC 9039, Section 4.4 |
| | Numbers | |
+---------+---------------------------+-----------------------+
| ops | Organization Product and | RFC 9039, Section 4.5 |
| | Serial Numbers | |
+---------+---------------------------+-----------------------+
| example | Reserved for examples | RFC 9039, Section 4.6 |
+---------+---------------------------+-----------------------+
Table 1 2
Additional subtypes for DEV URNs can be defined through Specification
Required or IESG Approval [RFC8126]. These allocations are
appropriate when there is a new namespace of some type of device
identifier that is defined in a stable fashion and has a publicly
available specification.
Note that the organization (Section 4.3) device identifiers can also
be used in some cases, at least as a temporary measure. It is
preferable, however, that long-term usage of a broadly employed
device identifier be registered with IETF rather than used through
the organization device identifier type.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[IEEE.EUI64]
IEEE, "Guidelines for Use of Extended Unique Identifier
(EUI), Organizationally Unique Identifier (OUI), and
Company ID (CID)", August 2017,
<https://standards.ieee.org/content/dam/ieee-
standards/standards/web/documents/tutorials/eui.pdf>.
[OW] Maxim, "Guide to 1-Wire Communication", June 2008,
<https://www.maximintegrated.com/en/design/technical-
documents/tutorials/1/1796.html>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J.
Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Structure of Management Information
Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2578, April 1999,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2578>.
[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986>.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
[RFC8141] Saint-Andre, P. and J. Klensin, "Uniform Resource Names
(URNs)", RFC 8141, DOI 10.17487/RFC8141, April 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8141>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[IEEE.EUI64]
IEEE, "Guidelines for 64-bit Global Identifier (EUI-64)",
August 2017, <https://standards.ieee.org/content/dam/ieee-
standards/standards/web/documents/tutorials/eui.pdf>.
[OW] Maxim, "Guide to 1-Wire Communication", June 2008,
<https://www.maximintegrated.com/en/design/technical-
documents/tutorials/1/1796.html>.
8.2. Informative References
[CoRE-RD] Amsüss, C., Ed., Shelby, Z., Koster, M., Bormann, C., and
P. van der Stok, "CoRE Resource Directory", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-core-resource-
directory-28, 7 March 2021, <https://tools.ietf.org/html/
draft-ietf-core-resource-directory-28>.
[LwM2M] Alliance, O. M., "OMA Lightweight Machine to Machine
Requirements", OMA Standard Candidate Version 1.2, January
2019, <https://www.openmobilealliance.org/release/
LightweightM2M/V1_2-20190124-C/OMA-RD-LightweightM2M-
V1_2-20190124-C.pdf>.
[RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3261, June 2002,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3261>.
[RFC4122] Leach, P., Mealling, M., and R. Salz, "A Universally
Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4122, July 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4122>.
[RFC7230] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer
Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax
[RFC5612] Eronen, P. and Routing",
RFC 7230, DOI D. Harrington, "Enterprise Number for
Documentation Use", RFC 5612, DOI 10.17487/RFC5612, August
2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5612>.
[RFC6920] Farrell, S., Kutscher, D., Dannewitz, C., Ohlman, B.,
Keranen, A., and P. Hallam-Baker, "Naming Things with
Hashes", RFC 6920, DOI 10.17487/RFC6920, April 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6920>.
[RFC7230] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer
Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing",
RFC 7230, DOI 10.17487/RFC7230, June 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7230>.
[RFC7252] Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., and C. Bormann, "The Constrained
Application Protocol (CoAP)", RFC 7252,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7252, June 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7252>.
[RFC7254] Montemurro, M., Ed., Allen, A., McDonald, D., and P.
Gosden, "A Uniform Resource Name Namespace for the Global
System for Mobile Communications Association (GSMA) and
the International Mobile station Equipment Identity
(IMEI)", RFC 7254, DOI 10.17487/RFC7254, May 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7254>.
[RFC7405] Kyzivat, P., "Case-Sensitive String Support in ABNF",
RFC 7405, DOI 10.17487/RFC7405, December 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7405>.
[RFC7540] Belshe, M., Peon, R., and M. Thomson, Ed., "Hypertext
Transfer Protocol Version 2 (HTTP/2)", RFC 7540,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7540, May 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7540>.
[RFC7721] Cooper, A., Gont, F., and D. Thaler, "Security and Privacy
Considerations for IPv6 Address Generation Mechanisms",
RFC 7721, DOI 10.17487/RFC7721, March 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7721>.
[RFC8259] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259>.
[W3C.REC-xml-19980210]
Sperberg-McQueen, C., Bray, T., and J. Paoli, "Extensible
Markup Language (XML) 1.0", W3C Recommendation, February
1998, <http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210>.
[RFC7252] Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., and C. Bormann, "The Constrained
Application Protocol (CoAP)", RFC 7252,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7252, June 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7252>.
[RFC8428] Jennings, C., Shelby, Z., Arkko, J., Keranen, A., and C.
Bormann, "Sensor Measurement Lists (SenML)", RFC 8428,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8428, August 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8428>.
[RFC6920] Farrell, S., Kutscher, D., Dannewitz, C., Ohlman, B.,
Keranen, A., and P. Hallam-Baker, "Naming Things with
Hashes", RFC 6920, DOI 10.17487/RFC6920, April 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6920>.
[RFC7254] Montemurro, M., Ed., Allen, A., McDonald, D., and P.
Gosden, "A Uniform Resource Name Namespace for the Global
System for Mobile Communications Association (GSMA) and
the International Mobile station Equipment Identity
(IMEI)", RFC 7254, DOI 10.17487/RFC7254, May 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7254>.
[RFC7405] Kyzivat, P., "Case-Sensitive String Support in ABNF",
RFC 7405, DOI 10.17487/RFC7405, December 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7405>.
[RFC8464] Atarius, R., "A URN Namespace for Device Identity and
Mobile Equipment Identity (MEID)", RFC 8464,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8464, September 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8464>.
[CoRE-RD] Amsüss, C., Ed., Shelby, Z., Koster, M., Bormann,
[W3C.REC-xml-19980210]
Sperberg-McQueen, C., Bray, T., and
P. van der Stok, "CoRE Resource Directory", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-core-resource-
directory-28, 7 March 2021, <https://tools.ietf.org/html/
draft-ietf-core-resource-directory-28>.
[LwM2M] Alliance, O. M., "OMA Lightweight Machine to Machine
Requirements", OMA Standard Candidate Version 1.2, January
2019, <https://www.openmobilealliance.org/release/
LightweightM2M/V1_2-20190124-C/OMA-RD-LightweightM2M-
V1_2-20190124-C.pdf>. J. Paoli, "Extensible
Markup Language (XML) 1.0", W3C Recommendation, February
1998, <http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210>.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Ari Keränen, Stephen Farrell,
Christer Holmberg, Peter Saint-Andre, Wouter Cloetens, Jaime Jimenez,
Joseph Knapp, Padmakumar Subramani, Mert Ocak, Hannes Tschofenig, Jim
Schaad, Thomas Fossati, Carsten Bormann, Marco Tiloca, Barry Leiba,
Amanda Baber, Juha Hakala, Dale Worley, Warren Kumari, Benjamin
Kaduk, Brian Weis, John Klensin, Dave Thaler, Russ Housley, Dan
Romascanu, Éric Vyncke, Roman Danyliw, and Ahmad Muhanna for their
feedback and interesting discussions in this problem space. We would
also like to note prior documents that focused on specific device
identifiers, such as [RFC7254] and [RFC8464].
Authors' Addresses
Jari Arkko
Ericsson
FI-02420 Jorvas
Finland
Email: jari.arkko@piuha.net
Cullen Jennings
Cisco
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134
United States of America
Phone: +1 408 421-9990
Email: fluffy@iii.ca
Zach Shelby
ARM
Kidekuja 2
FI-88600 Vuokatti
Finland
Phone: +358407796297
Edge Impulse
3031 Tisch Way
San Jose, CA 95128
United States of America
Email: Zach.Shelby@arm.com zach@edgeimpulse.com