draft-ietf-sacm-rolie-softwaredescriptor-07.txt		draft-ietf-sacm-rolie-softwaredescriptor-08.txt
	SACM Working Group S. Banghart		SACM Working Group S. Banghart
	Internet-Draft D. Waltermire		Internet-Draft D. Waltermire
	Intended status: Informational NIST		Intended status: Informational NIST
	Expires: December 27, 2019 June 25, 2019		Expires: January 22, 2020 July 21, 2019
	Definition of the ROLIE Software Descriptor Extension		Definition of the ROLIE Software Descriptor Extension
	draft-ietf-sacm-rolie-softwaredescriptor-07		draft-ietf-sacm-rolie-softwaredescriptor-08
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document uses the "information-type" extension point as defined		This document uses the "information-type" extension point as defined
	in the Resource-Oriented Lightweight Information Exchange (ROLIE)		in the Resource-Oriented Lightweight Information Exchange (ROLIE)
	[RFC8322] Section 7.1.2 to better support Software Record and		[RFC8322] Section 7.1.2 to better support Software Record and
	Software Inventory use cases. This specification registers a new		Software Inventory use cases. This specification registers a new
	ROLIE information-type, "software-descriptor", that allows for the		ROLIE information-type, "software-descriptor", that allows for the
	categorization of information relevant to software description		categorization of information relevant to software description
	activities and formats. In particular, the usage of the ISO		activities and formats. In particular, the usage of the ISO
	skipping to change at page 1, line 40 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 40 ¶
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on December 27, 2019.		This Internet-Draft will expire on January 22, 2020.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	skipping to change at page 3, line 42 ¶		skipping to change at page 3, line 42 ¶
	that are to be published to or retrieved from a ROLIE repository.		that are to be published to or retrieved from a ROLIE repository.
	2. Terminology		2. Terminology
	The key words "MUST," "MUST NOT," "REQUIRED," "SHALL," "SHALL NOT,"		The key words "MUST," "MUST NOT," "REQUIRED," "SHALL," "SHALL NOT,"
	"SHOULD," "SHOULD NOT," "RECOMMENDED," "MAY," and "OPTIONAL" in this		"SHOULD," "SHOULD NOT," "RECOMMENDED," "MAY," and "OPTIONAL" in this
	document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].		document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
	As an extension of [RFC8322], this document refers to many terms		As an extension of [RFC8322], this document refers to many terms
	defined in that document. In particular, the use of "Entry" and		defined in that document. In particular, the use of "Entry" and
	"Feed" are aligned with the definitions presented in section TODO of		"Feed" are aligned with the definitions presented in RFC8322.
	ROLIE.
	Several places in this document refer to the "information-type" of a		Several places in this document refer to the "information-type" of a
	Resource (Entry or Feed). This refers to the "term" attribute of an		Resource (Entry or Feed). This refers to the "term" attribute of an
	"atom:category" element whose scheme is		"atom:category" element whose scheme is
	"urn:ietf:params:rolie:category:information-type". For an Entry,		"urn:ietf:params:rolie:category:information-type". For an Entry,
	this value can be inherited from it's containing Feed as per		this value can be inherited from it's containing Feed as per
	[RFC8322].		[RFC8322].
	3. Background		3. Background
	skipping to change at page 8, line 30 ¶		skipping to change at page 8, line 30 ¶
	typical Entry, this is derived from the information-type of the		typical Entry, this is derived from the information-type of the
	Feed it is contained in. For a standalone Entry, this is provided		Feed it is contained in. For a standalone Entry, this is provided
	by an "atom:category" element.		by an "atom:category" element.
	o The document linked to by the "href" attribute of the		o The document linked to by the "href" attribute of the
	"atom:content" element is a COSWID Tag per [I-D.ietf-sacm-coswid]		"atom:content" element is a COSWID Tag per [I-D.ietf-sacm-coswid]
	A "COSWID Tag Entry" MUST conform to the following requirements:		A "COSWID Tag Entry" MUST conform to the following requirements:
	o The value of the "type" attribute of the atom:content element MUST		o The value of the "type" attribute of the atom:content element MUST
	be "application/coswid+cbor".		be "application/swid+cbor".
	o There MUST be one "rolie:property" with the "name" attribute equal		o There MUST be one "rolie:property" with the "name" attribute equal
	to "urn:ietf:params:rolie:property:content-id" and the "value"		to "urn:ietf:params:rolie:property:content-id" and the "value"
	attribute exactly equal to the "tag-id" element in the attached		attribute exactly equal to the decoded "tag-id" element in the
	COSWID Tag (mapped to integer 0). This allows ROLIE consumers to		attached COSWID Tag (mapped to integer 0). This allows ROLIE
	more easily search for COSWID tags without needing to download the		consumers to more easily search for COSWID tags without needing to
	tag itself.		download the tag itself.
	o There MUST be one "rolie:property" with the "name" attribute equal		o There MUST be one "rolie:property" with the "name" attribute equal
	to "urn:ietf:params:rolie:property:swd:swname", and the "value"		to "urn:ietf:params:rolie:property:swd:swname", and the "value"
	attribute equal to the value of the "swid-name" element in the		attribute equal to the decoded value of the "swid-name" element in
	attached COSWID Tag (mapped to the integer 1). As above, this		the attached COSWID Tag (mapped to the integer 1). As above, this
	helps ROLIE consumers search and filter Entries.		helps ROLIE consumers search and filter Entries.
	o There MAY be a property element with the "name" attribute equal to		o There MAY be a property element with the "name" attribute equal to
	"urn:ietf:params:rolie:property:swd:swversion". When this		"urn:ietf:params:rolie:property:swd:swversion". When this
	property appears, it's value MUST be equal to the value of the		property appears, it's value MUST be equal to the decoded value of
	tag-version element in the attached COSWID Tag (mapped to the		the tag-version element in the attached COSWID Tag (mapped to the
	integer 12).		integer 12).
	7. atom:link Extensions		7. atom:link Extensions
	This section defines additional link relationships that		This section defines additional link relationships that
	implementations MUST support. These relationships are not registered		implementations MUST support. These relationships are not registered
	in the Link Relation IANA table as their use case is too narrow.		in the Link Relation IANA table as their use case is too narrow.
	Each relationship is named and described.		Each relationship is named and described.
	+----------------------+--------------------------------------------+		+----------------------+--------------------------------------------+
	skipping to change at page 12, line 15 ¶		skipping to change at page 12, line 15 ¶
	Version information is often represented differently across		Version information is often represented differently across
	manufacturers and even across product releases. If using software		manufacturers and even across product releases. If using software
	version information for low fault tolerance comparisons and searches,		version information for low fault tolerance comparisons and searches,
	care should be taken that the correct version scheme is being used.		care should be taken that the correct version scheme is being used.
	10. Normative References		10. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-sacm-coswid]		[I-D.ietf-sacm-coswid]
	Birkholz, H., Fitzgerald-McKay, J., Schmidt, C., and D.		Birkholz, H., Fitzgerald-McKay, J., Schmidt, C., and D.
	Waltermire, "Concise Software Identification Tags", draft-		Waltermire, "Concise Software Identification Tags", draft-
	ietf-sacm-coswid-10 (work in progress), June 2019.		ietf-sacm-coswid-11 (work in progress), June 2019.
	[NISTIR8060]		[NISTIR8060]
	Waltermire, D., Cheikes, B., Feldman, L., and G. Witte,		Waltermire, D., Cheikes, B., Feldman, L., and G. Witte,
	"Guidelines for the Creation of Interoperable Software		"Guidelines for the Creation of Interoperable Software
	Identification (SWID) Tags", NISTIR 8060, April 2016,		Identification (SWID) Tags", NISTIR 8060, April 2016,
	<https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8060>.		<https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8060>.
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,		DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
End of changes. 9 change blocks.
	15 lines changed or deleted		14 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/