Question(s):
2/11
Meeting, date:
Study Group:
11
Working Party:
1/11
Source:
Editor of Q.3615 (ex Q.ProGeoSMS)
Title:
A.5 justification information for draft new Q.3615 (ex Q.ProGeoSMS) "Protocol for GeoSMS"
Contact:
Name
Organization
Country
Tel: +
xx
E-mail:
a@b.com
Contact:
Tel: +xx
E-mail:a@b.com
Abstract:
This TD contains the A.5 justification for draft new Q.3615 (ex Q.ProGeoSMS) "Protocol for GeoSMS" including the following normative references: IETF RFC 3986 (2005), IETF RFC 7230 (2014), OGC 11-030r1 (2012).
1Introduction
According to ITU procedures, as described in
ITU-T Recommendation A.5
, any normative reference to documentation produced outside the ITU (other than ISO and IEC texts) needs to be evaluated by the study group or working party before a decision is made to incorporate the reference in an ITU-T Recommendation.
This TD contains the A.5 justification information for new Q.3615 (ex Q.ProGeoSMS) "Protocol for GeoSMS".
2Referred documents and respective justifications
- IETF RFC 3986 (2005): Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax
-
Standards track document approved 2005-01. Also Known As STD 66.
-
Q.ProGeoSMS includes URIs and URLs in several syntax elements.
-
Complete A.5 justification information can be found in
Annex 1
.
- IETF RFC 7230 (2014): Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing
-
Standards track document - Proposed Standard approved June 2014. Obsoleted by RFC 9110 and RFC 9112.
-
Q.ProGeoSMS includes URIs and URLs that use HTTP scheme in several syntax elements.
-
Complete A.5 justification information can be found in
Annex 2
.
- OGC 11-030r1 (2012): OGC: Open GeoSMS Standard - Core
-
Document approved in 07 September 2011.
-
Q.3615 adopted the structure defined in OGC 11-030r1.
-
Complete A.5 justification information can be found in
Annex 3
.
Annex 1
A.5 justification information for the reference to IETF RFC 3986 (2005)
1
Clear description of the referenced document:
IETF RFC 3986 (2005): Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax
2
Status of approval:
Standards track document approved 2005-01. Also Known As STD 66.
3
Justification for the specific reference:
Q.ProGeoSMS includes URIs and URLs in several syntax elements.
4
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=3986
5
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
Document published in January 2005 (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt). The status is STANDARD.
6
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
Document published in January 2005 (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt). The status is STANDARD. Updated by RFC 6874, RFC 7320, RFC 8820. Obsoletes RFC 2732, RFC 1808, RFC 2396. Errata exist. Also Known As STD 66.
7
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
URIs are widely used to identify resources.
8
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
Normative References[ASCII] American National Standards Institute, "Coded Character Set -- 7-bit American Standard Code for Information Interchange", ANSI X3.4, 1986.[RFC2234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997.[STD63] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, November 2003.[UCS] International Organization for Standardization, "Information Technology - Universal Multiple-Octet Coded Character Set (UCS)", ISO/IEC 10646:2003, December 2003.Informative References[BCP19] Freed, N. and J. Postel, "IANA Charset Registration Procedures", BCP 19, RFC 2978, October 2000.[BCP35] Petke, R. and I. King, "Registration Procedures for URL Scheme Names", BCP 35, RFC 2717, November 1999.[RFC0952] Harrenstien, K., Stahl, M., and E. Feinler, "DoD Internet host table specification", RFC 952, October 1985.[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.[RFC1123] Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application and Support", STD 3, RFC 1123, October 1989.[RFC1535] Gavron, E., "A Security Problem and Proposed Correction With Widely Deployed DNS Software", RFC 1535, October 1993.[RFC1630] Berners-Lee, T., "Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW: A Unifying Syntax for the Expression of Names and Addresses of Objects on the Network as used in the World-Wide Web", RFC 1630, June 1994.[RFC1736] Kunze, J., "Functional Recommendations for Internet Resource Locators", RFC 1736, February 1995.[RFC1737] Sollins, K. and L. Masinter, "Functional Requirements for Uniform Resource Names", RFC 1737, December 1994.[RFC1738] Berners-Lee, T., Masinter, L., and M. McCahill, "Uniform Resource Locators (URL)", RFC 1738, December 1994.[RFC1808] Fielding, R., "Relative Uniform Resource Locators", RFC 1808, June 1995.[RFC2046] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046, November 1996.[RFC2141] Moats, R., "URN Syntax", RFC 2141, May 1997.[RFC2396] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396, August 1998.[RFC2518] Goland, Y., Whitehead, E., Faizi, A., Carter, S., and D. Jensen, "HTTP Extensions for Distributed Authoring -- WEBDAV", RFC 2518, February 1999.[RFC2557] Palme, J., Hopmann, A., and N. Shelness, "MIME Encapsulation of Aggregate Documents, such as HTML (MHTML)", RFC 2557, March 1999.[RFC2718] Masinter, L., Alvestrand, H., Zigmond, D., and R. Petke, "Guidelines for new URL Schemes", RFC 2718, November 1999.[RFC2732] Hinden, R., Carpenter, B., and L. Masinter, "Format for Literal IPv6 Addresses in URL's", RFC 2732, December 1999.[RFC3305] Mealling, M. and R. Denenberg, "Report from the Joint W3C/IETF URI Planning Interest Group: Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs), URLs, and Uniform Resource Names (URNs): Clarifications and Recommendations", RFC 3305, August 2002.[RFC3490] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello, "Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)", RFC 3490, March 2003.[RFC3513] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Addressing Architecture", RFC 3513, April 2003.[Siedzik] Siedzik, R., "Semantic Attacks: What's in a URL?", April 2001, http://www.giac.org/practical/gsec/Richard_Siedzik_GSEC.pdf.
9
Qualification of ISOC/IETF:
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
10
Other (for any supplementary information):
None
Annex 2
A.5 justification information for the reference to IETF RFC 7230 (2014)
1
Clear description of the referenced document:
IETF RFC 7230 (2014): Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing
2
Status of approval:
Standards track document - Proposed Standard approved June 2014. Obsoleted by RFC 9110 and RFC 9112.
3
Justification for the specific reference:
Q.ProGeoSMS includes URIs and URLs that use HTTP scheme in several syntax elements.
4
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=7230
5
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
RFC 7230 was published in September 2013 and is a standards track RFC. It is largely used for World Wide Web service and related Web Browsers.
6
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
The concepts in this document is sufficiently stable for our use. Errata exist. Updated by RFC 8615. Obsoletes RFC 2616, RFC 2145. Updates RFC 2818, RFC 2817.
7
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
RFC 7230 Obsoletes RFC 2616, RFC 2145 and updates RFC 2818, RFC 2817, and has been updated by RFC 8615.
8
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
a) Normative References[RFC0793] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7, RFC 793, September 1981. [RFC1950] Deutsch, L. and J-L. Gailly, "ZLIB Compressed Data Format Specification version 3.3", RFC 1950, May 1996. [RFC1951] Deutsch, P., "DEFLATE Compressed Data Format Specification version 1.3", RFC 1951, May 1996. [RFC1952] Deutsch, P., Gailly, J-L., Adler, M., Deutsch, L., and G. Randers-Pehrson, "GZIP file format specification version 4.3", RFC 1952, May 1996. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC 3986, January 2005. [RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008. [RFC7231] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content", RFC 7231, June 2014. [RFC7232] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Conditional Requests", RFC 7232, June 2014. [RFC7233] Fielding, R., Ed., Lafon, Y., Ed., and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Range Requests", RFC 7233, June 2014. [RFC7234] Fielding, R., Ed., Nottingham, M., Ed., and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching", RFC 7234, June 2014. [RFC7235] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Authentication", RFC 7235, June 2014. [USASCII] American National Standards Institute, "Coded Character Set -- 7-bit American Standard Code for Information Interchange", ANSI X3.4, 1986. [Welch] Welch, T., "A Technique for High-Performance Data Compression", IEEE Computer 17(6), June 1984. b) Informative References [BCP115] Hansen, T., Hardie, T., and L. Masinter, "Guidelines and Registration Procedures for New URI Schemes", BCP 115, RFC 4395, February 2006. [BCP13] Freed, N., Klensin, J., and T. Hansen, "Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures", BCP 13, RFC 6838, January 2013. [BCP90] Klyne, G., Nottingham, M., and J. Mogul, "Registration Procedures for Message Header Fields", BCP 90, RFC 3864, September 2004. [Georgiev] Georgiev, M., Iyengar, S., Jana, S., Anubhai, R., Boneh, D., and V. Shmatikov, "The Most Dangerous Code in the World: Validating SSL Certificates in Non- browser Software", In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS '12), pp. 38-49, October 2012, http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2382196.2382204. [ISO-8859-1] International Organization for Standardization, "Information technology -- 8-bit single-byte coded graphic character sets -- Part 1: Latin alphabet No. 1", ISO/IEC 8859-1:1998, 1998. [Klein] Klein, A., "Divide and Conquer - HTTP Response Splitting, Web Cache Poisoning Attacks, and Related Topics", March 2004, http://packetstormsecurity.com/ papers/general/whitepaper_httpresponse.pdf. [Kri2001] Kristol, D., "HTTP Cookies: Standards, Privacy, and Politics", ACM Transactions on Internet Technology 1(2), November 2001, http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.SE/0105018. [Linhart] Linhart, C., Klein, A., Heled, R., and S. Orrin, "HTTP Request Smuggling", June 2005, http://www.watchfire.com/news/whitepapers.aspx. [RFC1919] Chatel, M., "Classical versus Transparent IP Proxies", RFC 1919, March 1996. [RFC1945] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and H. Nielsen, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.0", RFC 1945, May 1996. [RFC2045] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies", RFC 2045, November 1996. [RFC2047] Moore, K., "MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part Three: Message Header Extensions for Non-ASCII Text", RFC 2047, November 1996. [RFC2068] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Nielsen, H., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2068, January 1997. [RFC2145] Mogul, J., Fielding, R., Gettys, J., and H. Nielsen, "Use and Interpretation of HTTP Version Numbers", RFC 2145, May 1997. [RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999. [RFC2817] Khare, R. and S. Lawrence, "Upgrading to TLS Within HTTP/1.1", RFC 2817, May 2000. [RFC2818] Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818, May 2000. [RFC3040] Cooper, I., Melve, I., and G. Tomlinson, "Internet Web Replication and Caching Taxonomy", RFC 3040, January 2001. [RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements", RFC 4033, March 2005. [RFC4559] Jaganathan, K., Zhu, L., and J. Brezak, "SPNEGO-based Kerberos and NTLM HTTP Authentication in Microsoft Windows", RFC 4559, June 2006. [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 2008. [RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, August 2008. [RFC5322] Resnick, P., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322, October 2008. [RFC6265] Barth, A., "HTTP State Management Mechanism", RFC 6265, April 2011. [RFC6585] Nottingham, M. and R. Fielding, "Additional HTTP Status Codes", RFC 6585, April 2012.
9
Qualification of ISOC/IETF:
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
10
Other (for any supplementary information):
None.
Annex 3
A.5 justification information for the reference to OGC 11-030r1 (2012)
1
Clear description of the referenced document:
OGC 11-030r1 (2012): OGC: Open GeoSMS Standard - Core
2
Status of approval:
Document approved in 07 September 2011.
3
Justification for the specific reference:
Q.3615 adopted the structure defined in OGC 11-030r1.
4
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
Information on IPR issues regarding OGC 11-030r1 is available at: http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/legalfaq.
5
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
Document published in 19 January 2012 (https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=44146).The document type is IS(GIS implementation specficiation).
6
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
Document published in 19 January 2012 (https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=44146).Document updates the previous version known as 09-142r1.
7
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
None.
8
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
None.
9
Qualification of OGC:
10
Other (for any supplementary information):
None.
_________________
-
PAGE
1
-