Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-cbor-time-tag
draft-ietf-cbor-time-tag
Network Working Group C. Bormann
Internet-Draft Universität Bremen TZI
Intended status: Standards Track B. Gamari
Expires: 2 May 2024 Well-Typed
H. Birkholz
Fraunhofer SIT
30 October 2023
Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Tags for Time, Duration, and
Period
draft-ietf-cbor-time-tag-12
Abstract
The Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR, RFC 8949) is a data
format whose design goals include the possibility of extremely small
code size, fairly small message size, and extensibility without the
need for version negotiation.
In CBOR, one point of extensibility is the definition of CBOR tags.
RFC 8949 defines two tags for time: CBOR tag 0 (RFC3339 time as a
string) and tag 1 (POSIX time as int or float). Since then,
additional requirements have become known. The present document
defines a CBOR tag for time that allows a more elaborate
representation of time, as well as related CBOR tags for duration and
time period. This document is intended as the reference document for
the IANA registration of the CBOR tags defined.
// (This cref will be removed by the RFC editor:) The present
// revision (–12) addresses the IESG reviews.
About This Document
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
Status information for this document may be found at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cbor-time-tag/.
Discussion of this document takes place on the CBOR Working Group
mailing list (mailto:cbor@ietf.org), which is archived at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cbor/. Subscribe at
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cbor/.
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
https://github.com/cbor-wg/time-tag.
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 2 May 2024.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Time Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Key 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. Keys 4 and 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. Keys -3, -6, -9, -12, -15, -18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.4. Key -1: Timescale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.5. Clock Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.5.1. ClockClass (Key -2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.5.2. ClockAccuracy (Key -4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.5.3. OffsetScaledLogVariance (Key -5) . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.5.4. Uncertainty (Key -7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.5.5. Guarantee (Key -8) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.6. Keys -10, 10: Time Zone Hint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
3.7. Keys -11, 11: IXDTF Suffix Information . . . . . . . . . 11
4. Duration Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5. Period Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6. CDDL typenames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7.1. CBOR tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7.2. Timescale Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7.3. Time Tag Map Key Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Appendix A. Collected CDDL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
1. Introduction
The Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR, [RFC8949]) provides
for the interchange of structured data without a requirement for a
pre-agreed schema. RFC 8949 defines a basic set of data types, as
well as a tagging mechanism that enables extending the set of data
types supported via an IANA registry for CBOR tags (Section 9.2 of
[RFC8949], [IANA.cbor-tags]).
RFC 8949 defines two tags for time: CBOR tag 0 (RFC3339 time as a
string) and tag 1 (POSIX time as int or float). Since then,
additional requirements have become known. The present document
defines a CBOR tag for time that allows a more elaborate
representation of time, as well as related CBOR tags for duration and
time period. This document is intended as the reference document for
the IANA registration of the CBOR tags defined.
1.1. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
The term "byte" is used in its now customary sense as a synonym for
"octet".
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
Superscript notation denotes exponentiation. For example, 2 to the
power of 64 is notated: 2^64. In the plain-text rendition of this
specification, superscript notation is not available and
exponentiation therefore is rendered by the surrogate notation seen
here in the plain-text rendition.
CBOR diagnostic notation is defined in Section 8 of [RFC8949] and
Appendix G of [RFC8610]. A machine-processable model of the data
structures defined in this specification is provided throughout the
text using the Concise Data Definition Language, CDDL [RFC8610];
Appendix A provides the collected model information.
Several time-related terms such as UTC and TAI are discussed in
[IXDTF], which may be a useful companion document beyond its direct
use in Sections 3.6 and 3.7.
2. Objectives
For the time tag, the present specification addresses the following
objectives that go beyond the original tags 0 and 1 (defined in
Sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2 of [RFC8949]):
* Additional resolution for epoch-based time (as in tag 1). CBOR
tag 1 only provides for integer and up to binary64 floating point
representation of times, limiting resolution to approximately
microseconds at the time of writing (and progressively becoming
worse over time).
* Indication of timescale. Tags 0 and 1 are defined for UTC;
however, some interchanges are better performed on TAI. Other
timescales may be registered once they become relevant (e.g., one
of the proposed successors to UTC that might no longer use leap
seconds, or a scale based on smeared leap seconds).
By incorporating a way to transport [IXDTF] suffix information
(Section 3.6, Section 3.7), additional indications can be provided of
intents about the interpretation of the time given, in particular
also for instances of time that, at the time they are being
described, are in the future. Intents might include information
about time zones, daylight savings times, preferred calendar
representations, etc.
Semantics not covered by this document can be added by registering
additional map keys for the map that is the content of the tag (see
etime-detailed in Figure 1), the specification for which is
referenced by the registry entry (see Section 3).
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
For example, map keys could be registered for direct representations
of natural platform time formats. Some platforms use epoch-based
time formats that require some computation to convert them into the
representations allowed by tag 1; these computations can also lose
precision and cause ambiguities. (The present specification does not
take a position on whether tag 1 can be "fixed" to include, e.g.,
Decimal or BigFloat representations. It does define how to use these
representations with the extended time format.)
Additional tags are defined for durations and periods.
3. Time Format
An extended time is indicated by CBOR tag 1001, the content of which
is a map data item (CBOR major type 5). The map may contain integer
(major types 0 and 1) or text string (major type 3) keys, with the
value type determined by each specific key. For negative integer
keys and text string values of the key, implementations MUST ignore
key/value pairs they do not understand; these keys are "elective", as
the extended time as a whole is still usable without the information
they carry if an implementation elects not to implement them.
Conversely, for unsigned integer keys, implementations MUST signal as
an error key/value pairs they do not understand or implement (these
are either "base time" or "critical", see below).
The map MUST contain exactly one unsigned integer key that specifies
the "base time", and MAY also contain one or more negative integer or
text-string keys, which may encode supplementary information.
Supplementary information MAY also be provided by additional unsigned
integer keys that are explicitly defined to provide supplementary
information (we say these keys are defined to be "critical"); as
these are required to be understood, there can be no confusion with
base time keys.
Negative integer and text string keys always supply supplementary
information (they are "elective", and this will not be explicitly
stated below).
Supplementary information may include:
* a higher precision time offset to be added to the base time,
* a reference timescale and epoch different from the default UTC and
1970-01-01
* information about clock quality parameters, such as source,
accuracy, and uncertainty
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
Additional keys can be defined by registering them in the Map Key
Registry (Section 7.3). Registered keys may, for instance, add
intent information such as timezone and daylight savings time, and/or
possibly positioning coordinates, to express information that would
indicate a local time.
This document does not define supplementary text keys. A number of
both unsigned and negative-integer keys are defined in the following
subsections.
Figure 1 provides a formal definition of Tag 1001 in CDDL.
Etime = #6.1001(etime-detailed)
etime-framework = {
uint => any ; at least one base time
* (nint/text) => any ; elective supplementary information
* uint => any ; critical supplementary information
}
etime-detailed = ({
$$ETIME-BASETIME
ClockQuality-group
* $$ETIME-ELECTIVE
* $$ETIME-CRITICAL
* ((nint/text) .feature "etime-elective-extension") => any
* (uint .feature "etime-critical-extension") => any
}) .within etime-framework
Figure 1: CDDL definition of Tag 1001
3.1. Key 1
Key 1 indicates a base time value that is exactly like the data item
that would be tagged by CBOR tag 1 (POSIX time [TIME_T] as int or
float). As described above, the time value indicated by the value
under this key can be further modified by other keys.
$$ETIME-BASETIME //= (1: ~time)
3.2. Keys 4 and 5
Keys 4 and 5 indicate a base time value and are like key 1, except
that the data item is an array as defined for CBOR tag 4 or 5,
respectively. This can be used to include a Decimal or Bigfloat
epoch-based float [TIME_T] in an extended time, e.g., to achieve
higher resolution or to avoid rounding errors.
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
$$ETIME-BASETIME //= (4: ~decfrac)
$$ETIME-BASETIME //= (5: ~bigfloat)
3.3. Keys -3, -6, -9, -12, -15, -18
The keys -3, -6, -9, -12, -15 and -18 indicate additional decimal
fractions by giving an unsigned integer (major type 0) and scaling
this with the scale factor 1e-3, 1e-6, 1e-9, 1e-12, 1e-15, and 1e-18,
respectively (see Table 1). Each extended time data item MUST NOT
contain more than one of these keys. These additional fractions are
added to a base time in seconds [SI-SECOND] indicated by a Key 1,
which then MUST also be present and MUST have an integer value.
+=====+==============+=================+
| Key | meaning | example usage |
+=====+==============+=================+
| -3 | milliseconds | Java time |
+-----+--------------+-----------------+
| -6 | microseconds | (old) UNIX time |
+-----+--------------+-----------------+
| -9 | nanoseconds | (new) UNIX time |
+-----+--------------+-----------------+
| -12 | picoseconds | Haskell time |
+-----+--------------+-----------------+
| -15 | femtoseconds | (future) |
+-----+--------------+-----------------+
| -18 | attoseconds | (future) |
+-----+--------------+-----------------+
Table 1: Key for decimally scaled
Fractions
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-3: uint)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-6: uint)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-9: uint)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-12: uint)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-15: uint)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-18: uint)
Note that these keys have been provided to facilitate representing
pairs of the form second/decimal fraction of a second, as found for
instance in C timespec (Section 7.27.1 of [C]). When ingesting a
timestamp with one of these keys into a type provided by the target
platform, care has to be taken to meet its invariants. E.g., for C
timespec, the fractional part tv_nsec needs to be between 0 inclusive
and 10^9 exclusive, which can be achieved by also adjusting the base
time appropriately.
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
3.4. Key -1: Timescale
Key -1 is used to indicate a timescale. The value 0 indicates UTC,
with the POSIX epoch [TIME_T]; the value 1 indicates TAI, with the
PTP (Precision Time Protocol) epoch (1 January 1970 00:00:00 TAI, see
[IEEE1588-2019] or [IEEE1588-2008]).
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-1 => $ETIME-TIMESCALE)
$ETIME-TIMESCALE /= &(etime-utc: 0)
$ETIME-TIMESCALE /= &(etime-tai: 1)
If key -1 is not present, the default timescale value 0 is implied.
Timescale values MUST be unsigned integers or text strings; text
strings are provided for experimentation and MUST NOT be used between
parties which are not both part of the experiment. Additional
unsigned integer values can be registered in the Timescale Registry
(Section 7.2). (Note that there should be no timescales "GPS" or
"NTP" [RFC5905] — instead, the time should be converted to TAI or UTC
using a single addition or subtraction.)
t = t - 2208988800
utc ntp
t = t + 315964819
tai gps
Figure 2: Converting Common Offset Timescales
| Editor's note: This initial set of timescales was deliberately
| chosen to be frugal, as the specification of the tag provides
| an extension point where additional timescales can be
| registered at any time. Registrations are clearly needed for
| earth-referenced timescales (such as UT1 and TT), as well as
| possibly for specific realizations of abstract time scales
| (such as TAI(USNO) which is more accurate as a constant offset
| basis for GPS times). While the registration process itself is
| trivial, these registrations need to be made based on a solid
| specification of their actual definition.
3.5. Clock Quality
A number of keys are defined to indicate the quality of clock that
was used to determine the point in time.
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
The first three are analogous to clock-quality-grouping in [RFC8575],
which is in turn based on the definitions in [IEEE1588-2008]; the
last two are specific to this document.
ClockQuality-group = (
? &(ClockClass: -2) => uint .size 1 ; PTP/RFC8575
? &(ClockAccuracy: -4) => uint .size 1 ; PTP/RFC8575
? &(OffsetScaledLogVariance: -5) => uint .size 2 ; PTP/RFC8575
? &(Uncertainty: -7) => ~time/~duration
? &(Guarantee: -8) => ~time/~duration
)
3.5.1. ClockClass (Key -2)
Key -2 (ClockClass) can be used to indicate the clock class as per
[RFC8575] (which is based on Table 5 in Section 7.6.2.4 of
[IEEE1588-2008]; Table 4 in Section 7.6.2.5 of [IEEE1588-2019] has
updated language). It is defined as a one-byte unsigned integer as
that is the range defined in IEEE 1588.
3.5.2. ClockAccuracy (Key -4)
Key -4 (ClockAccuracy) can be used to indicate the clock accuracy as
per [RFC8575] (which is based on Table 6 in Section 7.6.2.5 of
[IEEE1588-2008]; additional values have been defined in Table 5 in
Section 7.6.2.6 of [IEEE1588-2019]). It is defined as a one-byte
unsigned integer as that is the range defined there. The range
between 23 and 47 is a slightly distorted logarithmic scale from 1 ps
to 1 s in [IEEE1588-2019] (in [IEEE1588-2008] the range was a subset
of that, 32 to 47 for 25 ns to 1 s) — see Figure 3; the number 254 is
the value to be used if an unknown accuracy needs to be expressed.
acc
enum ≈ 48 + ⌊2 ⋅log ──── - ε⌋
acc 10 s
Figure 3: Approximate conversion from accuracy to accuracy
enumeration value
3.5.3. OffsetScaledLogVariance (Key -5)
Key -5 (OffsetScaledLogVariance) can be used to represent the
variance exhibited by the clock when it has lost its synchronization
with an external reference clock. The details for the computation of
this characteristic are defined in Section 7.6.3 of [IEEE1588-2019]
and the same section in [IEEE1588-2008].
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
3.5.4. Uncertainty (Key -7)
Key -7 (Uncertainty) can be used to represent a known measurement
uncertainty for the clock, as a numeric value in seconds or as a
duration (Section 4).
For this document, uncertainty is defined as in Section 2.2.3 of
[GUM]: "parameter, associated with the result of a measurement, that
characterizes the dispersion of the values that could reasonably be
attributed to the measurand". More specifically, the value for this
key represents the expanded uncertainty for k = 2 (Section 6.2.1 of
[GUM]), in seconds.
Note that the additional information that can be meaningfully
provided with the duration that represents an uncertainty is limited,
e.g., it is not customary to provide an uncertainty for a duration
representing an uncertainty. Implementations are free to reduce the
information contained in an uncertainty (which is already elective)
to the information they can process.
For example, a timestamp that is given to a resolution of 10^-6
seconds (microseconds) but only has an uncertainty of 10^-3 seconds
(milliseconds) could be expressed by one of the extended time tags in
Figure 4 (note the slight rounding error in the third case, which is
probably inconsequential for an uncertainty value):
1001({1: 1697724754, -6: 873294, -7: {1: 0, -6: 1000}}),
1001({1: 1697724754, -6: 873294, -7: {1: 0, -3: 1}}),
1001({1: 1697724754, -6: 873294, -7: {1: 0.001}})
Figure 4: Examples Using Uncertainty
3.5.5. Guarantee (Key -8)
Key -8 (Guarantee) can be used to represent a stated guarantee for
the accuracy of the point in time, as a numeric value in seconds or
as a duration (Section 4) representing the maximum allowed deviation
from the true value.
While such a guarantee is unattainable in theory, existing standards
such as [RFC3161] stipulate the representation of such guarantees,
and therefore this format provides a way to represent them as well;
the time value given is nominally guaranteed to not deviate from the
actual time by more than the value of the guarantee, in seconds.
Note that the additional information that can be meaningfully
provided with the duration that represents a guarantee is limited,
e.g., it is not meaningful to provide a guarantee of accuracy for the
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
duration representing a guarantee of accuracy. Implementations are
free to reduce a guarantee (which is already elective) to the
information they can process.
3.6. Keys -10, 10: Time Zone Hint
Keys -10 and 10 supply supplementary information, where key 10 is
critical.
They can be used to provide a hint about the time zone that would
best fit for displaying the time given to humans, using a text string
in the format defined for time-zone-name or time-numoffset in
[IXDTF]. Key -10 is equivalent to providing this information as an
elective hint, while key 10 provides this information as critical
(i.e., it MUST be used when interpreting the entry with this key).
Keys -10 and 10 MUST NOT both be present.
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-10: time-zone-info)
$$ETIME-CRITICAL //= (10: time-zone-info)
time-zone-info = tstr .abnf
("time-zone-name / time-numoffset" .det IXDTFtz)
IXDTFtz = '
time-hour = 2DIGIT ; 00-23
time-minute = 2DIGIT ; 00-59
time-numoffset = ("+" / "-") time-hour ":" time-minute
time-zone-initial = ALPHA / "." / "_"
time-zone-char = time-zone-initial / DIGIT / "-" / "+"
time-zone-part = time-zone-initial *13(time-zone-char)
; but not "." or ".."
time-zone-name = time-zone-part *("/" time-zone-part)
ALPHA = %x41-5A / %x61-7A ; A-Z / a-z
DIGIT = %x30-39 ; 0-9
' ; extracted from [IXDTF] and [RFC3339]; update as needed
3.7. Keys -11, 11: IXDTF Suffix Information
Keys -11 and 11 supply supplementary information, where key 11 is
critical.
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
Similar to keys -10 and 10, keys -11 (elective) and 11 (critical) can
be used to provide additional information in the style of IXDTF
suffixes, such as the calendar that would best fit for displaying the
time given to humans. The key's value is a map that has IXDTF
suffix-key names as keys and corresponding suffix values as values,
specifically:
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-11: suffix-info-map)
$$ETIME-CRITICAL //= (11: suffix-info-map)
suffix-info-map = { * suffix-key => suffix-values }
suffix-key = tstr .abnf ("suffix-key" .det IXDTF)
suffix-values = one-or-more<suffix-value>
one-or-more<T> = T / [ 2* T ]
suffix-value = tstr .abnf ("suffix-value" .det IXDTF)
IXDTF = '
key-initial = lcalpha / "_"
key-char = key-initial / DIGIT / "-"
suffix-key = key-initial *key-char
suffix-value = 1*alphanum
alphanum = ALPHA / DIGIT
lcalpha = %x61-7A
ALPHA = %x41-5A / %x61-7A ; A-Z / a-z
DIGIT = %x30-39 ; 0-9
' ; extracted from [IXDTF]; update as needed!
When keys -11 and 11 both are present, the two maps MUST NOT have
entries with the same map keys.
Figure 4 of [IXDTF] gives an example for an extended date-time with
both time zone and suffix information:
1996-12-19T16:39:57-08:00[America/Los_Angeles][u-ca=hebrew]
A time tag that is approximating this example, in CBOR diagnostic
notation, would be:
/ 1996-12-19T16:39:57-08:00[America//Los_Angeles][u-ca=hebrew] /
1001({ 1: 851042397,
-10: "America/Los_Angeles",
-11: { "u-ca": "hebrew" }
})
Note that both -10 and -11 are using negative keys and therefore
provide elective information, as in the IXDTF form given in the
comment. Note also that in this example the time numeric offset
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
(-08:00) is lost in translating from the [RFC3339] information in the
IXDTF into a POSIX time that can be included under Key 1 in a time
tag.
4. Duration Format
A duration is the length of an interval of time. Durations in this
format are given in SI seconds, possibly adjusted for conventional
corrections of the timescale given (e.g., leap seconds).
Except for using Tag 1002 instead of 1001, durations are structurally
identical to time values.
Duration = #6.1002(etime-detailed)
Semantically, they do not measure the time elapsed from a given
epoch, but from the start to the end of (an otherwise unspecified)
interval of time.
In combination with an epoch identified in the context, a duration
can also be used to express an absolute time.
Without such context, durations are subject to some uncertainties
underlying the timescale used. E.g., for durations intended as a
determinant of future time periods, there is some uncertainty of what
irregularities (such as leap seconds, timescale corrections) will be
exhibited by the timescale in that period. For durations as
measurements of past periods, abstracting the period to a duration
loses some detail about timescale irregularities. For many
applications, these uncertainties are acceptable and thus the use of
durations is appropriate.
| Note that the durations defined in [ISO8601:1988] and
| [ISO8601-1:2019] are rather different from the ones defined in
| the present specification; there is no intention to support ISO
| 8601 durations here.
5. Period Format
A period is a specific interval of time, specified as either two
extended times giving the start and the end of that interval, or as
one of these two plus a duration.
This is represented as an array of unwrapped time and duration
elements, tagged with Tag 1003, one of:
* a start and end time, in which case the tag content is an array of
two unwrapped extended time elements;
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
* a start time with duration or an end time with duration. The tag
content is an array of 3 elements: the first two as above but
either the start or end time MUST be set to null; the third one
then is an unwrapped duration.
A simple CDDL definition that does not capture all the constraints
is:
simple-Period = #6.1003([
start: ~Etime / null
end: ~Etime / null
? duration: ~Duration
])
Exactly two out of the three elements must be present and non-null;
this can be somewhat more verbosely expressed in CDDL as:
Period = #6.1003([
(start: ~Etime,
((end: ~Etime) //
(end: null,
duration: ~Duration))) //
(start: null,
end: ~Etime,
duration: ~Duration)
])
6. CDDL typenames
When detailed validation is not needed, the type names defined in
Figure 5 are recommended:
etime = #6.1001({* (int/tstr) => any})
duration = #6.1002({* (int/tstr) => any})
period = #6.1003([~etime/null, ~etime/null, ~duration/null])
Figure 5: Recommended type names for CDDL
7. IANA Considerations
// RFC Editor: please replace RFCthis with the RFC number of this
// RFC, and remove this note.
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
7.1. CBOR tags
In the "CBOR Tags" registry [IANA.cbor-tags], IANA has allocated the
tags in Table 2 from what was at the time the FCFS space, with the
present document as the specification reference.
+======+===========+=========================+
| Tag | Data Item | Semantics |
+======+===========+=========================+
| 1001 | map | [RFCthis] extended time |
+------+-----------+-------------------------+
| 1002 | map | [RFCthis] duration |
+------+-----------+-------------------------+
| 1003 | array | [RFCthis] period |
+------+-----------+-------------------------+
Table 2: Values for Tags
IANA is requested to change the "Data Item" column for Tag 1003 from
"map" to "array".
7.2. Timescale Registry
This specification defines a new registry titled "Timescales" in the
"CBOR Tags" registry group [IANA.cbor-tags], with a Registration
Procedure requiring both "Expert Review" and "RFC Required" (Sections
4.5 and 4.7 of [BCP26]).
Each entry needs to provide a timescale name (a sequence of uppercase
ASCII characters and digits, where a digit may not occur at the
start: [A-Z][A-Z0-9]*), a value (CBOR unsigned integer, uint,
0..18446744073709551615), a brief description of the semantics, and a
specification reference (RFC). The initial contents are shown in
Table 3.
+===========+=======+======================+===========+
| Timescale | Value | Semantics | Reference |
+===========+=======+======================+===========+
| UTC | 0 | UTC with POSIX Epoch | [RFCthis] |
+-----------+-------+----------------------+-----------+
| TAI | 1 | TAI with PTP Epoch | [RFCthis] |
+-----------+-------+----------------------+-----------+
Table 3: Initial Content of Timescale Registry
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
7.3. Time Tag Map Key Registry
This specification defines a new registry titled "Time Tag Map Keys"
in the "CBOR Tags" registry group [IANA.cbor-tags], with
"Specification Required" as the Registration Procedure (Section 4.6
of [BCP26]).
The designated expert is requested to assign the key values with the
shortest encodings (1+0 and 1+1 encoding) to registrations that are
likely to enjoy wide use and can benefit from short encodings.
Each entry needs to provide a map key value (CBOR integer, int,
-18446744073709551616..18446744073709551615), a brief description of
the semantics, and a specification reference. Note that negative
integers indicate an elective key, while unsigned integers indicate a
key that either provides a base time or is critical. For the
unsigned integers as keys, the choice of base time or critical needs
to be indicated in the brief semantics description. (Elective map
keys may be explicitly marked as such in the description, e.g., to
distinguish them from critical keys.)
The initial contents are shown in Table 4.
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
+=======+=====================================+=====================+
| Value | Semantics | Reference |
+=======+=====================================+=====================+
| -18 | attoseconds | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| -15 | femtoseconds | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| -12 | picoseconds | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| -11 | IXDTF Suffix Information (elective) | [RFCthis], [IXDTF] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| -10 | IXDTF Time Zone Hint (elective) | [RFCthis], [IXDTF] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| -9 | nanoseconds | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| -8 | Guarantee | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| -7 | Uncertainty | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| -6 | microseconds | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| -5 | Offset-Scaled Log Variance | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| -4 | Clock Accuracy | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| -3 | milliseconds | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| -2 | Clock Class | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| 1 | base time value as in CBOR Tag 1 | [RFC8949] |
| | | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| 4 | base time value as in CBOR Tag 4 | [RFC8949] |
| | | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| 5 | base time value as in CBOR Tag 5 | [RFC8949] |
| | | [RFCthis] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| 10 | IXDTF Time Zone Hint (critical) | [RFCthis], [IXDTF] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
| 11 | IXDTF Suffix Information (critical) | [RFCthis], [IXDTF] |
+-------+-------------------------------------+---------------------+
Table 4: Initial Content of Time Tag Map Keys Registry
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
8. Security Considerations
The security considerations of [RFC8949] apply; the tags introduced
here are not expected to raise security considerations beyond those.
Time, of course, has significant security considerations; these
include the exploitation of ambiguities where time is security
relevant (e.g., for freshness or in a validity span) or the
disclosure of characteristics of the emitting system (e.g., time
zone, or clock resolution and wall clock offset).
A more detailed discussion of security considerations emanating from
using a representation of time that allows the inclusion of complex,
possibly inconsistent information is available in Section 7 (Security
Considerations) of [IXDTF].
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[BCP26] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8126>.
[GUM] Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, "Evaluation of
measurement data — Guide to the expression of uncertainty
in measurement", JCGM 100:2008, September 2008,
<https://www.bipm.org/en/publications/guides/gum.html>.
[IANA.cbor-tags]
IANA, "Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Tags",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/cbor-tags>.
[IEEE1588-2008]
IEEE, "IEEE Standard for a Precision Clock Synchronization
Protocol for Networked Measurement and Control Systems",
IEEE 1588-2008, July 2008,
<https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/1588/4355/>. Often
called PTP v2, as it replaced the earlier 2002 version of
this standard by a non-backwards compatible protocol.
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
[IEEE1588-2019]
IEEE, "IEEE Standard for a Precision Clock Synchronization
Protocol for Networked Measurement and Control Systems",
IEEE 1588-2019, June 2020,
<https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/1588/6825/>. Often
called PTP v2.1, as it has been designed so it can be used
in a way that is fully backwards compatible to
IEEE1588-2008.
[IXDTF] Sharma, U. and C. Bormann, "Date and Time on the Internet:
Timestamps with additional information", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-sedate-datetime-extended-11, 23
October 2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
draft-ietf-sedate-datetime-extended-11>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.
[RFC8575] Jiang, Y., Ed., Liu, X., Xu, J., and R. Cummings, Ed.,
"YANG Data Model for the Precision Time Protocol (PTP)",
RFC 8575, DOI 10.17487/RFC8575, May 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8575>.
[RFC8610] Birkholz, H., Vigano, C., and C. Bormann, "Concise Data
Definition Language (CDDL): A Notational Convention to
Express Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) and
JSON Data Structures", RFC 8610, DOI 10.17487/RFC8610,
June 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8610>.
[RFC8949] Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object
Representation (CBOR)", STD 94, RFC 8949,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8949, December 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8949>.
[SI-SECOND]
International Organization for Standardization (ISO),
"Quantities and units — Part 3: Space and time",
ISO 80000-3, 1 March 2006.
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
[TIME_T] The Open Group Base Specifications, "Vol. 1: Base
Definitions, Issue 7", Section 4.16 'Seconds Since the
Epoch', IEEE Std 1003.1-2017, 2018 Edition, 2018,
<http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/
V1_chap04.html#tag_04_16>.
9.2. Informative References
[C] International Organization for Standardization,
"Information technology — Programming languages — C",
Fourth Edition, ISO/IEC 9899:2018, June 2018,
<https://www.iso.org/standard/74528.html>. Contents
available via <https://www.open-
std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2310.pdf
(https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/
n2310.pdf)>
[ISO8601-1:2019]
ISO, "Date and time — Representations for information
interchange — Part 1: Basic rules", ISO 8601-1:2019,
February 2019, <https://www.iso.org/standard/70907.html>.
[ISO8601:1988]
ISO, "Data elements and interchange formats — Information
interchange — Representation of dates and times",
ISO 8601:1988, June 1988,
<https://www.iso.org/standard/15903.html>. Also available
from <https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/FIPS/
fipspub4-1-1991.pdf
(https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/FIPS/
fipspub4-1-1991.pdf)>.
[RFC3161] Adams, C., Cain, P., Pinkas, D., and R. Zuccherato,
"Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Time-Stamp
Protocol (TSP)", RFC 3161, DOI 10.17487/RFC3161, August
2001, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3161>.
[RFC3339] Klyne, G. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the Internet:
Timestamps", RFC 3339, DOI 10.17487/RFC3339, July 2002,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3339>.
[RFC5905] Mills, D., Martin, J., Ed., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch,
"Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms
Specification", RFC 5905, DOI 10.17487/RFC5905, June 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5905>.
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
Appendix A. Collected CDDL
This appendix collects the CDDL rules spread over the document into
one convenient place.
Etime = #6.1001(etime-detailed)
etime-framework = {
uint => any ; at least one base time
* (nint/text) => any ; elective supplementary information
* uint => any ; critical supplementary information
}
etime-detailed = ({
$$ETIME-BASETIME
ClockQuality-group
* $$ETIME-ELECTIVE
* $$ETIME-CRITICAL
* ((nint/text) .feature "etime-elective-extension") => any
* (uint .feature "etime-critical-extension") => any
}) .within etime-framework
$$ETIME-BASETIME //= (1: ~time)
$$ETIME-BASETIME //= (4: ~decfrac)
$$ETIME-BASETIME //= (5: ~bigfloat)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-3: uint)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-6: uint)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-9: uint)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-12: uint)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-15: uint)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-18: uint)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-1 => $ETIME-TIMESCALE)
$ETIME-TIMESCALE /= &(etime-utc: 0)
$ETIME-TIMESCALE /= &(etime-tai: 1)
ClockQuality-group = (
? &(ClockClass: -2) => uint .size 1 ; PTP/RFC8575
? &(ClockAccuracy: -4) => uint .size 1 ; PTP/RFC8575
? &(OffsetScaledLogVariance: -5) => uint .size 2 ; PTP/RFC8575
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
? &(Uncertainty: -7) => ~time/~duration
? &(Guarantee: -8) => ~time/~duration
)
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-10: time-zone-info)
$$ETIME-CRITICAL //= (10: time-zone-info)
time-zone-info = tstr .abnf
("time-zone-name / time-numoffset" .det IXDTFtz)
IXDTFtz = '
time-hour = 2DIGIT ; 00-23
time-minute = 2DIGIT ; 00-59
time-numoffset = ("+" / "-") time-hour ":" time-minute
time-zone-initial = ALPHA / "." / "_"
time-zone-char = time-zone-initial / DIGIT / "-" / "+"
time-zone-part = time-zone-initial *13(time-zone-char)
; but not "." or ".."
time-zone-name = time-zone-part *("/" time-zone-part)
ALPHA = %x41-5A / %x61-7A ; A-Z / a-z
DIGIT = %x30-39 ; 0-9
' ; extracted from [IXDTF] and [RFC3339]; update as needed
$$ETIME-ELECTIVE //= (-11: suffix-info-map)
$$ETIME-CRITICAL //= (11: suffix-info-map)
suffix-info-map = { * suffix-key => suffix-values }
suffix-key = tstr .abnf ("suffix-key" .det IXDTF)
suffix-values = one-or-more<suffix-value>
one-or-more<T> = T / [ 2* T ]
suffix-value = tstr .abnf ("suffix-value" .det IXDTF)
IXDTF = '
key-initial = lcalpha / "_"
key-char = key-initial / DIGIT / "-"
suffix-key = key-initial *key-char
suffix-value = 1*alphanum
alphanum = ALPHA / DIGIT
lcalpha = %x61-7A
ALPHA = %x41-5A / %x61-7A ; A-Z / a-z
DIGIT = %x30-39 ; 0-9
' ; extracted from [IXDTF]; update as needed!
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
Duration = #6.1002(etime-detailed)
Period = #6.1003([
start: ~Etime / null
end: ~Etime / null
? duration: ~Duration / null
])
clumsy-Period = #6.1003([
(start: ~Etime,
((end: ~Etime,
? duration: null) //
(end: null,
duration: ~Duration))) //
(start: null,
end: ~Etime,
duration: ~Duration)
])
etime = #6.1001({* (int/tstr) => any})
duration = #6.1002({* (int/tstr) => any})
period = #6.1003([~etime/null, ~etime/null, ~duration/null])
Figure 6: Collected CDDL rules from this specification
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the many comments from members
of the CBOR WG, Francesca Palombini for her AD review, and Thomas
Fossati and Qin Wu for their directorate reviews.
Authors' Addresses
Carsten Bormann
Universität Bremen TZI
Postfach 330440
D-28359 Bremen
Germany
Phone: +49-421-218-63921
Email: cabo@tzi.org
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft CBOR tag for extended time October 2023
Ben Gamari
Well-Typed
117 Middle Rd.
Portsmouth, NH 03801
United States
Email: ben@well-typed.com
Henk Birkholz
Fraunhofer Institute for Secure Information Technology
Rheinstrasse 75
64295 Darmstadt
Germany
Email: henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de
Bormann, et al. Expires 2 May 2024 [Page 24]
