GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools

Problem, Formatting or Query -  Send Feedback

Was this page helpful?-10+1


rfc:rfc3354

Network Working Group D. Eastlake, III Request for Comments: 3354 Motorola Category: Informational August 2002

                   Internet Open Trading Protocol
                       Version 2 Requirements

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 (2002).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

 This document gives requirements for the Internet Open Trading
 Protocol (IOTP) Version 2 by describing design principles and scope
 and dividing features into those which will, may, or will not be
 included.
 Version 2 of the IOTP will extend the interoperable framework for
 Internet commerce capabilities of Version 1 while replacing the XML
 messaging and digital signature part of IOTP v1 with standards based
 mechanisms.

Table of Contents

 1. Introduction ...................................................2
 2. Design Principles and Scope ....................................2
 3. Requirements ...................................................2
 4. Security Considerations ........................................4
 References ........................................................4
 Authors Addresses .................................................5
 Full Copyright Statement ..........................................6

Eastlake Informational [Page 1] RFC 3354 IOTP V2 Requirements August 2002

1. Introduction

 Version 2 of the Internet Open Trading Protocol (IOTP) will extend
 the interoperable framework for Internet commerce capabilities of
 Version 1 [RFC 2801] as described in Section 3 below.  In addition,
 it will replace the ad hoc XML messaging and digital signature [RFC
 2802] parts of IOTP v1 with standards based mechanisms [RFC 3275].
 This document gives requirements for the Internet Open Trading
 Protocol (IOTP) Version 2 by describing design principles and scope
 and dividing features into those which will, may, or will not be
 included.

2. Design Principles and Scope

 1. The specification must describe the syntax and processing
    necessary for an extension of the interoperable framework for
    Internet commerce described in IOTP V1.0 [RFC 2801].
 2. Keep changes to IOTP V1.0 to a minimum.
 3. Maintain all existing functionality of IOTP V1.0.
 4. Test all XML DTDs and/or Schemas and XML examples in the
    specification to insure that they are well-formed.
 5. Create usage/implementation guidance information, probably as a
    separate document.
 6. It should be designed to work well with other protocols such as
    ECML [RFC 3106].
 7. IOTP Version 2 should be developed as part of the broader Web
    design philosophy of decentralization, URIs, Web data, and
    modularity /layering / extensibility.  [Berners-Lee, WebData] In
    this context, this standard should take advantage of existing
    provider (and infrastructure) primitives.

3. Requirements

 IOTP Version 2 will include the following:
 1. Be a superset of IOTP Version 1.
 2. Provide for the Dynamic Definition of Trading Sequences.  I.E.,
    transactions will not be limited, as with v1, to a single payment
    and a single delivery with delivery occurring after payment.

Eastlake Informational [Page 2] RFC 3354 IOTP V2 Requirements August 2002

    Instead, it will be possible to propose an arbitrary sequence of
    transaction steps.
 3. Include specification of an Offer Request Block.
 4. Support Improved Problem Resolution (extend to cover presentation
    of signed receipt to customer support party, better defined
    Customer Care role, etc.).
 5. Add provisions to indicate and handle a payment protocol not
    tunneled through IOTP.
 6. Add support for server based wallets.
 The following may be include in IOTP v2:
 1. Support Repeated/ongoing payments.  For example, a means to
    specify that a customer approval covers not only the instant
    purchase but also some limited number of future purchase with some
    total or per purchase spending limit.
 2. Enhanced Server to Server messages.  For example, a means for a
    Delivery Handler to inform a Payment Handler that goods have
    actually shipped, which may be a pre-condition for making a charge
    against a credit card.
 3. Include the ability to add both fields and attributes to existing
    trading blocks in addition to the present ability to add entirely
    new trading blocks.
 The following are out of scope for IOTP version 2:
 1. Legal or regulatory issues surrounding the implementation of the
    protocol or information systems using it.
 2. Design of an XML Messaging Layer.  Instead, whatever is or appears
    most likely to become the standard XML messaging layer will be
    used.  This includes a standard enveloping, addressing, and error
    reporting framework.
 3. Design of XML Digital Signatures.  Instead, the existing standard
    [RFC 3275] will be used.

Eastlake Informational [Page 3] RFC 3354 IOTP V2 Requirements August 2002

4. Security Considerations

 As provided above, IOTP v2 will provide optional authentication via
 standards based XML Digital Signatures [RFC 3275]; however, neither
 IOTP v1 nor v2 provide a confidentiality mechanism.  Both require the
 use of secure channels such as those provided by TLS [RFC 2246] or
 IPSEC for confidentiality and depend on the security mechanisms of
 any payment system used in conjunction with them to secure payments.

References

 [Berners-Lee] "Axioms of Web Architecture: URIs",
               <http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html>, "Web
               Architecture from 50,000 feet",
               <http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Architecture.html>.
 [RFC 2026]    Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process --
               Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
 [RFC 2246]    Dierks, T. and C. Allen, "The TLS Protocol: Version
               1.0", RFC 2246, January 1999.
 [RFC 2801]    Burdett, D., "Internet Open Trading Protocol - IOTP
               Version 1.0", RFC 2801, April 2000.
 [RFC 2802]    Davidson, K. and Y. Kawatsura, "Digital Signatures for
               the v1.0 Internet Open Trading Protocol (IOTP)", RFC
               2802, April 2000.
 [RFC 3106]    Eastlake, D. and T. Goldstein, "ECML v1.1: Field Names
               for E-Commerce", RFC 3106, April 2001.
 [RFC 3275]    Eastlake, D., Reagle, J. and D. Solo, "XML-Signature
               Syntax and Processing", RFC 3275, March 2002.
 [WebData]     "Web Architecture: Describing and Exchanging Data",
               <http://www.w3.org/1999/04/WebData>.
 [XML]         "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Second
               Edition)", <http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml>, T.
               Bray, J. Paoli, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen.

Eastlake Informational [Page 4] RFC 3354 IOTP V2 Requirements August 2002

Author's Addresses

 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
 Motorola
 155 Beaver Street
 Milford, MA 01757 USA
 Phone: +1-508-851-8280 (w)
        +1-508-634-2066 (h)
 EMail: Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com

Eastlake Informational [Page 5] RFC 3354 IOTP V2 Requirements August 2002

Full Copyright Statement

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002).  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 assigns.
 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.

Eastlake Informational [Page 6]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc3354.txt · Last modified: 2002/08/06 22:17 (external edit)