--- 1/draft-ietf-drip-reqs-02.txt 2020-07-13 17:13:09.223188566 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-drip-reqs-03.txt 2020-07-13 17:13:09.283190095 -0700 @@ -2,21 +2,21 @@ DRIP S. Card, Ed. Internet-Draft A. Wiethuechter Intended status: Informational AX Enterprize Expires: 14 January 2021 R. Moskowitz HTT Consulting A. Gurtov Linköping University 13 July 2020 Drone Remote Identification Protocol (DRIP) Requirements - draft-ietf-drip-reqs-02 + draft-ietf-drip-reqs-03 Abstract This document defines the requirements for Drone Remote Identification Protocol (DRIP) Working Group protocols to support Unmanned Aircraft System Remote Identification and tracking (UAS RID) for security, safety and other purposes. Complementing external technical standards as regulator-accepted means of compliance with UAS RID regulations, DRIP will: @@ -58,38 +58,38 @@ provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction (Informative) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Overall Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2. Intended Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.3. DRIP Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2. Terms and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.1. Requirements Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 2.2. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 3. UAS RID Problem Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 - 3.1. Network RID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 - 3.2. Broadcast RID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 - 3.3. DRIP Focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 - 4. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 2.2. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 3. UAS RID Problem Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 + 3.1. Network RID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 + 3.2. Broadcast RID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 3.3. DRIP Focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 4. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 4.1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 4.2. Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + 4.2. Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.3. Privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 - 4.4. Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 - 5. Discussion and Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 - 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 + 4.4. Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 5. Discussion and Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 + 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 - 8. Privacy and Transparency Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . 23 + 8. Privacy and Transparency Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . 24 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 - Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 + Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 1. Introduction (Informative) 1.1. Overall Context Many considerations (especially safety and security) dictate that UAS be remotely identifiable. Any Observer with responsibilities involving aircraft inherently must classify Unmanned Aircraft (UA) situationally according to basic considerations, as illustrated notionally in Figure 1 below. An Observer who classifies an UAS: as @@ -120,21 +120,21 @@ +--------------+ +--------------+ +--------------+ Figure 1: "Notional UAS Classification"> Civil Aviation Authorities (CAAs) worldwide are mandating Unmanned Aircraft System Remote Identification and tracking (UAS RID). The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has published [Delegated] and [Implementing] Regulations. The United States (US) Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has published a Notice of Proposed Rule Making [NPRM] and has described the key role that UAS - RID plays in UAS Traffic Management (UTM [CONOPS] especially + RID plays in UAS Traffic Management (UTM [FAACONOPS] especially Section 2.6). CAAs currently (2020) promulgate performance-based regulations that do not specify techniques, but rather cite industry consensus technical standards as acceptable means of compliance. ASTM International, Technical Committee F38 (UAS), Subcommittee F38.02 (Aircraft Operations), Work Item WK65041, developed ASTM F3411-19 [F3411-19] Standard Specification for Remote ID and Tracking. It defines two means of UAS RID: Network RID defines a set of information for UAS to make available @@ -143,43 +143,49 @@ Broadcast RID defines a set of messages for Unmanned Aircraft (UA) to transmit locally directly one-way over Bluetooth or Wi-Fi, to be received in real time by local Observers. The same information must be provided via both means. The presentation may differ, as Network RID defines a data dictionary, whereas Broadcast RID defines message formats (which carry items from that same data dictionary). The frequency with which it is sent may differ, as Network RID can accomodate Observer queries asynchronous - to UAS updates (which generally need be send only when information, - such as position, changes), whereas Broadcast RID depends upon + to UAS updates (which generally need be sent only when information, + such as GCS location, changes), whereas Broadcast RID depends upon Observers receiving UA messages at the time they are transmitted. Network RID depends upon Internet connectivity in several segments from the UAS to each Observer. Broadcast RID should need Internet (or other Wide Area Network) connectivity only for UAS registry information lookup using the directly locally received UAS Identifier - (UAS ID) as a key. + (UAS ID) as a key. Broadcast RID does not assume IP connectivity of + UAS; messages are encapsulated by the UA without IP, directly in + Bluetooth or WiFi link layer frames. [F3411-19] specifies three UAS ID types: TYPE-1 A static, manufacturer assigned, hardware serial number per ANSI/CTA-2063-A "Small Unmanned Aerial System Serial Numbers" [CTA2063A]. TYPE-2 A CAA assigned (presumably static) ID. TYPE-3 A UTM system assigned UUID [RFC4122], which can but need not be dynamic. The EU allows only Type 1; the US allows Types 1 and 3, but requires Type 3 IDs (if used) each to be used only once (for a single UAS - flight, which in the context of UTM is called an "operation"). + flight, which in the context of UTM is called an "operation"). The + EU also requires an operator registration number (an additional + identifier distinct from the UAS ID) that can be carried in an + [F3411-19] optional Operator ID message. + [F3411-19] Broadcast RID transmits all information as cleartext (ASCII or binary), so static IDs enable trivial correlation of patterns of use, unacceptable in many applications, e.g., package delivery routes of competitors. [WG105] addreses a "different scope than Direct Remote Identification... latter being primarily meant for security purposes... rather than for safety purposes (e.g. hazards deconfliction..." Aviation community standards set a higher bar for safety than for security. It "leaves the opportunity for those @@ -275,23 +281,24 @@ in severely constrained UAS environments, balancing legitimate (e.g., public safety) authorities' Need To Know trustworthy information with UAS operators' privacy. By "immediately actionable" is meant information of sufficient precision, accuracy, timeliness, etc. for an Observer to use it as the basis for immediate decisive action, whether that be to trigger a defensive counter-UAS system, to attempt to initiate communications with the UAS operator, to accept the presence of the UAS in the airspace where/when observed as not requiring further action, or whatever, with potentially severe consequences of any action or inaction chosen based on that - information. Potential follow-on goals may extend beyond providing - timely and trustworthy identification data, to using it to enable - identity-oriented networking of UAS. + information. For further explanation of the concept of immediate + actionability, see [ENISACSIRT]. Potential follow-on goals may + extend beyond providing timely and trustworthy identification data, + to using it to enable identity-oriented networking of UAS. DRIP (originally Trustworthy Multipurpose Remote Identification, TM- RID) potentially could be applied to verifiably identify other types of registered things reported to be in specified physical locations, but the urgent motivation and clear initial focus is UAS. Existing Internet resources (protocol standards, services, infrastructure, and business models) should be leveraged. A natural Internet based architecture for UAS RID conforming to proposed regulations and external technical standards is described in a companion architecture document [drip-architecture] and elaborated in other DRIP documents; @@ -362,25 +369,25 @@ functions." [ICAOATM] Authentication Message F3411 Message Type 2. Provides framing for authentication data, only. Basic ID Message F3411 Message Type 0. Provides UA Type, UAS ID Type and UAS ID, only. - BLOS + B-LOS Beyond Line Of Sight (LOS). Term to be avoided due to ambiguity. See LOS. - BVLOS + BV-LOS Beyond Visual Line Of Sight (V-LOS). See V-LOS. CAA Civil Aviation Authority. Two examples are the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). C2 Command and Control. A set of organizational and technical attributes and processes that employs human, physical, and @@ -498,21 +505,21 @@ EU regulatory requirement for Network RID. Requirement could be met with ASTM Network RID: Basic ID message with UAS ID Type 1; Location/Vector message; Operator ID message; System Message. Corresponds roughly to the Network RID portion of FAA NPRM Standard RID. Observer An entity (typically but not necessarily an individual human) who has directly or indirectly observed an UA and wishes to know something about it, starting with its ID. An observer typically - is on the ground and local (within VLOS of an observed UA), but + is on the ground and local (within V-LOS of an observed UA), but could be remote (observing via Network RID or other surveillance), operating another UA, aboard another aircraft , etc. Operation A flight, or series of flights of the same mission, by the same UAS, in the same airspace volume, separated by at most brief ground intervals. Operator "A person, organization or enterprise engaged in or offering to @@ -610,21 +617,22 @@ System component designed to handle the authentication requirements of RID by offloading verification to a web hosted service. USS UAS Service Supplier. "A USS is an entity that assists UAS Operators with meeting UTM operational requirements that enable safe and efficient use of airspace" and "... provide services to support the UAS community, to connect Operators and other entities to enable information flow across the USS Network, and to promote - shared situational awareness among UTM participants" per [CONOPS]. + shared situational awareness among UTM participants" per + [FAACONOPS]. UTM UAS Traffic Management. Per ICAO, "A specific aspect of air traffic management which manages UAS operations safely, economically and efficiently through the provision of facilities and a seamless set of services in collaboration with all parties and involving airborne and ground-based functions." In the US, per FAA, a "traffic management" ecosystem for "uncontrolled" low altitude UAS operations, separate from, but complementary to, the FAA's ATC system for "controlled" operations of manned aircraft. @@ -634,21 +642,21 @@ "remote" pilot who can clearly directly (without video cameras or any other aids other than glasses or under some rules binoculars) see the UA and its immediate flight environment. Potentially subject to blockage by foliage, structures, terrain or other vehicles, more so than RF-LOS. 3. UAS RID Problem Space UA may be fixed wing Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL), rotary wing (e.g., helicopter) Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL), or hybrid. - They may be single engine or multi engine. The most common today are + They may be single- or multi-engine. The most common today are multicopters: rotary wing, multi engine. The explosion in UAS was enabled by hobbyist development, for multicopters, of advanced flight stability algorithms, enabling even inexperienced pilots to take off, fly to a location of interest, hover, and return to the take-off location or land at a distance. UAS can be remotely piloted by a human (e.g., with a joystick) or programmed to proceed from Global Positioning System (GPS) waypoint to waypoint in a weak form of autonomy; stronger autonomy is coming. UA are "low observable": they typically have a small radar cross section; they make noise quite noticeable at short range but difficult to detect at distances they @@ -677,21 +685,22 @@ 3.1. Network RID Network RID has several variants. The UA may have persistent onboard Internet connectivity, in which case it can consistently source RID information directly over the Internet. The UA may have intermittent onboard Internet connectivity, in which case the GCS must source RID information whenever the UA itself is offline. The UA may not have Internet connectivity of its own, but have instead some other form of communications to another node that can relay RID information to the Internet; this would typically be the GCS (which to perform its - function must know where the UA is). + function must know where the UA is, although C2 link outages do + occur). The UA may have no means of sourcing RID information, in which case the GCS must source it; this is typical under FAA NPRM Limited RID proposed rules, which require providing the location of the GCS (not that of the UA). In the extreme case, this could be the pilot using a web browser/application to designate, to an UAS Service Supplier (USS) or other UTM entity, a time-bounded airspace volume in which an operation will be conducted; this may impede disambiguation of ID if multiple UAS operate in the same or overlapping spatio-temporal volumes. @@ -1085,23 +1094,20 @@ Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, . 9.2. Informative References - [CONOPS] FAA Office of NextGen, "UTM Concept of Operations v2.0", - March 2020. - [cpdlc] Gurtov, A., Polishchuk, T., and M. Wernberg, "Controller- Pilot Data Link Communication Security", MDPI Sensors 18(5), 1636, 2018, . [crowd-sourced-rid] Moskowitz, R., Card, S., Wiethuechter, A., Zhao, S., and H. Birkholz, "Crowd Sourced Remote ID", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-moskowitz-drip-crowd-sourced-rid-04, 20 May 2020, . [drip-uas-rid] Moskowitz, R., Card, S., Wiethuechter, A., and A. Gurtov, "UAS Remote ID", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft- moskowitz-drip-uas-rid-02, 28 May 2020, . + [ENISACSIRT] + European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA), + "Actionable information for Security Incident Response", + November 2014, . + [EU2018] European Parliament and Council, "2015/0277 (COD) PE-CONS 2/18", February 2018. - [F3411-19] ASTM, "Standard Specification for Remote ID and Tracking", - December 2019. + [F3411-19] ASTM International, "Standard Specification for Remote ID + and Tracking", February 2020, + . + + [FAACONOPS] + FAA Office of NextGen, "UTM Concept of Operations v2.0", + March 2020. [hhit-registries] Moskowitz, R., Card, S., and A. Wiethuechter, "Hierarchical HIT Registries", Work in Progress, Internet- Draft, draft-moskowitz-hip-hhit-registries-02, 9 March 2020, . [hierarchical-hit] Moskowitz, R., Card, S., and A. Wiethuechter, @@ -1231,21 +1249,23 @@ DOI 10.17487/RFC6973, July 2013, . [RFC8280] ten Oever, N. and C. Cath, "Research into Human Rights Protocol Considerations", RFC 8280, DOI 10.17487/RFC8280, October 2017, . [Roadmap] American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Unmanned Aircraft Systems Standardization Collaborative (UASSC), "Standardization Roadmap for Unmanned Aircraft Systems - draft v2.0", April 2020. + draft v2.0", April 2020, . [Stranger] Heinlein, R.A., "Stranger in a Strange Land", June 1961. [WG105] European Parliament and Council, "EUROCAE WG-105 draft Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Electronic Identification"", June 2020. Acknowledgments