diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc3616.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc3616.txt | 451 |
1 files changed, 451 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc3616.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc3616.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5ef9de4 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc3616.txt @@ -0,0 +1,451 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group F. Bellifemine +Request for Comments: 3616 Telecom Italia Lab +Category: Informational I. Constantinescu + EPFL + S. Willmott + UPC + September 2003 + + + A Uniform Resource Name (URN) Namespace for + Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (FIPA) + +Status of this Memo + + This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does + not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this + memo is unlimited. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved. + +Abstract + + This document describes a Uniform Resource Name Namespace + Identification (URN NID) for the Foundation for Intelligent Physical + Agents (FIPA). This URN NID will be used for identification of + standard components published by the FIPA standards body in the area + of Agent technology. + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 + 2. Specification Template. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 + 3. Namespace Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 4. Community Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 7. References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 7.1. Normative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 7.2. Informative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 8. Authors' Addresses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 9. Full Copyright Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + + + + + + + + +Bellifemine, et al. Informational [Page 1] + +RFC 3616 URN Namespace for FIPA September 2003 + + +1. Introduction + + The Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (FIPA) was established + in 1996 in Geneva, Switzerland. FIPA is an international non-profit + association of companies and organizations dedicated to promoting the + industry of intelligent agents by openly developing specifications + supporting interoperability among agents and agent-based + applications. The core mission of the FIPA standards consortium is + to facilitate the interworking of agents and agent systems across + multiple vendors' platforms. Since its inception, FIPA has counted + more than 60 member companies from over 20 different countries + worldwide. + + FIPA publishes technical specifications, schemas, diagrams and other + documentation related to the area of Agent technology. FIPA wishes + to create and manage globally unique, persistent, location- + independent identifiers for these resources. + +2. Specification Template + + Namespace ID: + + "fipa" + + Registration Information: + + Version 1 + Date: 2002-02-28 + + Declared registrant of the namespace: + + Name: FIPA Secretariat (J. Kelly) + E-mail: secretariat@fipa.org + Affiliation: Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (FIPA) + Address: c/o Me Jean-Pierre Jacquemoud + 2, rue Bellot + CH-1206 Geneve + + Declaration of structure: + + The identifier has a hierarchical structure as follows: + + urn:<assigned number>:{subspace-id1}:{subspace-id2}:... + + subspace-ids can be any US-ASCII string compliant with URI syntax + and not containing the ":" character. The subspaces are used to + divide the assigned namespace along one or more logical schemes. + + + + +Bellifemine, et al. Informational [Page 2] + +RFC 3616 URN Namespace for FIPA September 2003 + + + Examples of such schemes are: + + * By standardization area: + urn:fipa:language:acl + urn:fipa:ontology:management + + * By technical committee: + urn:fipa:architecture:example:directory + urn:fipa:architecture:example:greenpolicy + + Relevant ancillary documentation: + + None. + + Identifier uniqueness considerations: + + Assignment of URNs in the requested namespace will be managed by + the FIPA Architecture Board (FAB) which will ensure that URNs + assigned in the requested namespace are unique. + + Identifier persistence considerations: + + FIPA is committed to maintaining the availability and persistence + of all resources identified by assigned URNs. + + Process of identifier assignment: + + Assignment of URNs in the requested namespace will be managed by + the FIPA Architecture Board (FAB) which is responsible for + approval of all specifications published by FIPA. + + Process for identifier resolution: + + FIPA will maintain published lists of assigned identifiers on its + web pages at http://www.fipa.org. + + Rules for Lexical Equivalence: + + URNs are lexically equivalent if they are lexically identical. + + Conformance with URN Syntax: + + No special considerations. + + Validation mechanism: + + None specified. + + + + +Bellifemine, et al. Informational [Page 3] + +RFC 3616 URN Namespace for FIPA September 2003 + + + Scope: + + Global. + +3. Namespace Considerations + + As part of the consideration of the URN namespace issue, FIPA has + engaged in a survey of existing and proposed URN NID schemes which + might be used instead of applying for a dedicated scheme. FIPA's + specific requirements are that the namespace should be: + + - Globally unique + - Persistent + - Location-independent + - Reflect the logical structure of FIPA specifications (see section + 3) + - Be purely logical and without reference to "location" related + elements such as (in particular) domain names/Domain Name System + (DNS) entries such as URLs + - Be managed by the FIPA organisation to ensure the integrity, + correctness and uniqueness of the namespace. + + The closest to the requirements identified by FIPA were the proposed + Vocabulary (VOC) [4] and TAG [3] schemes: + + - In particular, TAG could be used in conjunction with the domain + name "fipa.org" which FIPA has registered to generate unique + identifiers. However, the problems with this scheme from FIPA's + perspective are (in order of importance): + + * It has not yet (to our knowledge) been approved / accepted by + IESG or IANA (making it inappropriate for use in a standards + document). + + * The labels generated related to the time date, owner of the + label but specify no particular semantics for the content/text + of the label which would be desirable to identify a hierarchy + of standards. + + * The uniqueness in the scheme is DNS based. + + - VOC provides a more logical structure for a logical hierarchy of + specifications but still presents the following problems: + + * It has not yet (to our knowledge) been approved / accepted by + IESG or IANA making it inappropriate for use in a standards + document). + + + + +Bellifemine, et al. Informational [Page 4] + +RFC 3616 URN Namespace for FIPA September 2003 + + + * The uniqueness in the scheme is DNS based. + + In both cases, there is no clear authority for managing the + correctness of the namespace. + +4. Community Considerations + + FIPA standards address the area of interoperability between + autonomous software systems (agents) in open environments such as + company intranets or the Internet itself. Communication between such + systems is highly contingent on developers and the systems themselves + being able to unambiguously identify which technology specifications + (interaction protocols, languages, domain descriptions and the like) + are to be used for particular purposes in any given interaction. + + The use of a managed, unique namespace for FIPA specification + components would therefore be of great benefit: + + - To the FIPA standards process: providing unique labels for + individual specification components. + + - To developers implementing systems based on FIPA standards: + identifying which specifications are in use in a particular + system, allowing them to develop software able to flexibly + distinguish between different technologies used. + + - To users of networks making use of FIPA technology (in whole or in + part): improving the integrity and clarity of interactions in the + system, allowing them to precisely identify technology + requirements for interacting with any given software system using + FIPA technology. + + Whilst the assignment of identifiers is managed by the FIPA + Architecture Board the application for identifiers is through the + open FIPA standards process - thus anybody following the process is + entitled to request an identifier for technologies they consider + relevant to FIPA's work. + + Final acceptance of any FIPA standard is contingent on a vote of the + FIPA membership. Although membership is not free (see [2] for + details of costs), it is open to any organisation with an interest in + FIPA's work. + + The initial plans for identifier resolution are to host a web page on + http://www.fipa.org to provide for resolution of identifiers FIPA + will also encourage third parties (FIPA members and others) to host + + + + + +Bellifemine, et al. Informational [Page 5] + +RFC 3616 URN Namespace for FIPA September 2003 + + + more advance dereferencing service or to develop software to provide + dereferencing where these provide a correct and accurate reflection + of the namespace. FIPA itself may also engage in such activities. + +5. IANA Considerations + + The IANA has registered formal URN namespace 14, to FIPA within the + IANA registry of URN NIDs. + +6. Security Considerations + + The FIPA URN Namespace ID shares the security considerations outlined + in RFC 3406 [1], but has no other known security considerations. + +7. References + +7.1. Normative References + + [1] Daigle, L., van Gulik, D., Iannella, R. and P. Faltstrom, + "Uniform Resource Names (URN) Namespace Definition Mechanisms", + BCP 66, RFC 3406, October 2002. + +7.2. Informative References + + [2] Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents. http://www.fipa.org/ + + [3] Kindberg, T. and S. Hawke, "The 'tag' URI scheme and URN + namespace", Work in Progress, September 2001. + + [4] Stickler, P., "The 'voc:' URI scheme for Vocabulary Terms and + Codes, Work in Progress, January 2002. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Bellifemine, et al. Informational [Page 6] + +RFC 3616 URN Namespace for FIPA September 2003 + + +8. Authors' Addresses + + Fabio Bellifemine + Chair of the FIPA Architecture Board + Telecom Italia Lab + + EMail: Fabio.Bellifemine@TILAB.COM + + + Ion Constantinescu + EPFL + + EMail: ion.constantinescu@epfl.ch + + + Steven Willmott + Universitat Polit/210cnica de Catalunya + + EMail: steve@lsi.upc.es + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Bellifemine, et al. Informational [Page 7] + +RFC 3616 URN Namespace for FIPA September 2003 + + +9. Full Copyright Statement + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved. + + This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to + others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it + or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published + and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any + kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are + included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this + document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing + the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other + Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of + developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for + copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be + followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than + English. + + The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be + revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees. + + This document and the information contained herein is provided on an + "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING + TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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. + +Acknowledgement + + Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the + Internet Society. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Bellifemine, et al. Informational [Page 8] + |