| < draft-moskowitz-drip-crowd-sourced-rid-06.txt | draft-moskowitz-drip-crowd-sourced-rid-07.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DRIP R. Moskowitz | DRIP R. Moskowitz | |||
| Internet-Draft HTT Consulting | Internet-Draft HTT Consulting | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track S. Card | Intended status: Standards Track S. Card | |||
| Expires: 27 November 2021 A. Wiethuechter | Expires: 2 November 2022 A. Wiethuechter | |||
| AX Enterprize | AX Enterprize | |||
| S. Zhao | S. Zhao | |||
| Tencent | Intel | |||
| H. Birkholz | H. Birkholz | |||
| Fraunhofer SIT | Fraunhofer SIT | |||
| 26 May 2021 | 1 May 2022 | |||
| Crowd Sourced Remote ID | Crowd Sourced Remote ID | |||
| draft-moskowitz-drip-crowd-sourced-rid-06 | draft-moskowitz-drip-crowd-sourced-rid-07 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document describes using the ASTM Broadcast Remote ID (B-RID) | This document describes using the ASTM Broadcast Remote ID (B-RID) | |||
| specification in a "crowd sourced" smart phone environment to provide | specification in a "crowd sourced" smart phone environment to provide | |||
| much of the ASTM and FAA envisioned Network Remote ID (N-RID) | much of the ASTM and FAA envisioned Network Remote ID (N-RID) | |||
| functionality. This crowd sourced B-RID data will use | functionality. This crowd sourced B-RID (CS-RID) data will use | |||
| multilateration to add a level of reliability in the location data on | multilateration to add a level of reliability in the location data on | |||
| the Unmanned Aircraft (UA). The crowd sourced environment will also | the Unmanned Aircraft (UA). The crowd sourced environment will also | |||
| provide a monitoring coverage map to authorized observers. | provide a monitoring coverage map to authorized observers. | |||
| Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
| This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | |||
| provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
| 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 27 November 2021. | This Internet-Draft will expire on 2 November 2022. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2022 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/ | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ | |||
| license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. | license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. | |||
| Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | |||
| and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components | and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components | |||
| extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text | extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as | |||
| as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are | described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are | |||
| provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. | provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 1.1. Draft Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 1.1. Role of Supplemental Data Service Provider (SDSP) . . . . 4 | |||
| 1.2. Draft Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | ||||
| 2. Terms and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2. Terms and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2.1. Requirements Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2.1. Requirements Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2.2. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2.2. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 3. Problem Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 3. Problem Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 3.1. Meeting the needs of Network Remote ID . . . . . . . . . 6 | 3.1. Meeting the needs of Network Remote ID . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 3.2. Advantages of Broadcast Remote ID . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 3.2. Advantages of Broadcast Remote ID . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 3.3. Trustworthiness of Proxied Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3.3. Trustworthiness of Proxied Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 3.4. Defense against fraudulent RID Messages . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3.4. Defense against fraudulent RID Messages . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 4. The Finder - SDSP Security Relationship . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 4. The Finder - SDSP Security Relationship . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 4.1. The Finder Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 4.1. SDSP Heartbeats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 4.2. Managing Finders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 4.2. The Finder Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 5. UA location via multilateration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 4.3. Managing Finders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 5.1. GPS Inaccuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 5. UA location via multilateration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 6. The CS-RID Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 5.1. GPS Inaccuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 6.1. CS-RID MESSAGE TYPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 6. The CS-RID Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 6.1.1. CDDL description for CS-RID message type . . . . . . 10 | 6.1. CS-RID MESSAGE TYPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
| 6.1.1. CDDL description for CS-RID message type . . . . . . 11 | ||||
| 6.2. The CS-RID B-RID Proxy Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 6.2. The CS-RID B-RID Proxy Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
| 6.2.1. CS-RID ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 6.2.1. CS-RID ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 6.2.2. CDDL description for CS-RID B-RID Proxy Message . . . 13 | 6.2.2. CDDL description for CS-RID B-RID Proxy Message . . . 13 | |||
| 6.3. CS-RID Finder Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 6.3. CS-RID Finder Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 6.3.1. CDDL description for Finder Registration . . . . . . 14 | 6.3.1. CDDL description for Finder Registration . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 6.4. CS-RID SDSP Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 6.4. CS-RID SDSP Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 6.4.1. CDDL description for SDSP Response . . . . . . . . . 15 | 6.4.1. CDDL description for SDSP Response . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 6.5. CS-RID Location Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 6.5. CS-RID Location Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 6.5.1. CDDL description for Location Update . . . . . . . . 16 | 6.5.1. CDDL description for Location Update . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 7. The Full CS-RID CDDL specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 6.6. SDSP Heartbeat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 7. The Full CS-RID CDDL specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 9.1. Privacy Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 9.1. Privacy Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | ||||
| 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| Appendix A. Using LIDAR for UA location . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | ||||
| Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | Appendix A. Using LIDAR for UA location . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | ||||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| This document defines a mechanism to capture the ASTM Broadcast | This document defines a mechanism to capture the ASTM Broadcast | |||
| Remote ID messages (B-RID) [F3411-19] on any Internet connected | Remote ID messages (B-RID) [F3411-19] on any Internet connected | |||
| device that receives them and can forward them to the SDSP(s) | device that receives them and can forward them to the SDSP(s) | |||
| responsible for the geographic area the UA and receivers are in. | (Supplemental Data Service Provider) responsible for the geographic | |||
| This will create a ecosystem that will meet most if not all data | area the UA and receivers are in. This will create a ecosystem that | |||
| collection requirements that CAAs are placing on Network Remote ID | will meet most if not all data collection requirements that CAAs | |||
| (N-RID). | (Civil Aviation Authority) are placing on Network Remote ID (N-RID). | |||
| These Internet connected devices are herein called "Finders", as they | These Internet connected devices are herein called "Finders", as they | |||
| find UAs by listening for B-RID messages. The Finders are B-RID | find UAs by listening for B-RID messages. The Finders are B-RID | |||
| forwarding proxies. Their potentially limited spacial view of RID | forwarding proxies. Their potentially limited spacial view of RID | |||
| messages could result in bad decisions on what messages to send to | messages could result in bad decisions on what messages to send to | |||
| the SDSP and which to drop. The SDSP will make any filtering | the SDSP and which to drop. Thus they will send all received | |||
| decisions in what it forwards to the UTM(s). | messages and the SDSP will make any filtering decisions in what it | |||
| forwards into the UTM (UAS Traffic Management). | ||||
| Finders can be smartphones, tablets, connected cars, or any computing | Finders can be smartphones, tablets, connected cars, or any computing | |||
| platform with Internet connectivity that can meet the requirements | platform with Internet connectivity that can meet the requirements | |||
| defined in this document. It is not expected, nor necessary, that | defined in this document. It is not expected, nor necessary, that | |||
| Finders have any information about a UAS beyond the content in the | Finders have any information about a UAS beyond the content in the | |||
| B-RID messages. | B-RID messages. | |||
| Finders MAY only need a loose association with the SDSP(s). They may | Finders MAY only need a loose association with the SDSP(s). They may | |||
| only have the SDSP's Public Key and FQDN. It would use these, along | only have the SDSP's Public Key and FQDN. It would use these, along | |||
| with the Finder's Public Key to use ECIES, or other security methods, | with the Finder's Public Key to use ECIES (Elliptic Curve Integrated | |||
| to send the messages in a secure manner to the SDSP. The SDSP MAY | Encryption Scheme), or other security methods, to send the messages | |||
| require a stronger relationship to the Finders. This may range from | in a secure manner to the SDSP. The SDSP MAY require a stronger | |||
| the Finder's Public Key being registered to the SDSP with other | relationship to the Finders. This may range from the Finder's Public | |||
| information so that the SDSP has some level of trust in the Finders | Key being registered to the SDSP with other information so that the | |||
| to requiring transmissions be sent over long-lived transport | SDSP has some level of trust in the Finders to requiring | |||
| connections like ESP or DTLS. | transmissions be sent over long-lived transport connections like ESP | |||
| or DTLS. | ||||
| If a 1-way only secure packet forwarding method is used (e.g., not a | ||||
| TCP connection), the Finder SHOULD receive periodic "heartbeats" from | ||||
| the SDSP to inform it that its transmissions are being received. The | ||||
| SDSP sets the rules on when to send these heartbeats as discuss below | ||||
| in Section 4.1. | ||||
| 1.1. Role of Supplemental Data Service Provider (SDSP) | ||||
| This document has minimal information about the actions of SDSPs. In | This document has minimal information about the actions of SDSPs. In | |||
| general the SDSP is out of scope of this document. That said, the | general the SDSP is out of scope of this document. That said, the | |||
| SDSPs should not simply proxy B-RID messages to the UTM(s). They | SDSPs should not simply proxy B-RID messages to the UTM(s). They | |||
| should perform some minimal level of filtering and content checking | should perform some minimal level of filtering and content checking | |||
| before forwarding those messages that pass these tests in a secure | before forwarding those messages that pass these tests in a secure | |||
| manner to the UTM(s). | manner to the UTM(s). | |||
| The SDSPs are also capable of maintaining a monitoring map, based on | The SDSPs are also capable of maintaining a monitoring map, based on | |||
| location of active Finders. UTMs may use this information to notify | location of active Finders. UTMs may use this information to notify | |||
| authorized observers of where there is and there is not monitoring | authorized observers of where there is and there is not monitoring | |||
| coverage. They may also use this information of where to place pro- | coverage. They may also use this information of where to place pro- | |||
| active monitoring coverage. | active monitoring coverage. | |||
| An SDSP SHOULD only forward Authenticated B-RID messages like those | An SDSP SHOULD only forward Authenticated B-RID messages like those | |||
| defined in [tmrid-auth] to the UTM(s). Further, the SDSP SHOULD | defined in [drip-authentication] to the UTM(s). Further, the SDSP | |||
| validate the Remote ID (RID) and the Authentication signature before | SHOULD validate the Remote ID (RID) and the Authentication signature | |||
| forwarding anything from the UA. The SDSP MAY forward all B-RID | before forwarding anything from the UA. The SDSP MAY forward all | |||
| messages to the UTM, leaving all decision making on B-RID messages | B-RID messages to the UTM, leaving all decision making on B-RID | |||
| veracity to the UTM. | messages veracity to the UTM. | |||
| When 3 or more Finders are reporting to an SDSP on a specific UA, the | When 3 or more Finders are reporting to an SDSP on a specific UA, the | |||
| SDSP is in a unique position to perform multilateration on these | SDSP is in a unique position to perform multilateration on these | |||
| messages and compute the Finder's view of the UA location to compare | messages and compute the Finder's view of the UA location to compare | |||
| with the UA Location/Vector messages. This check against the UA's | with the UA Location/Vector messages. This check against the UA's | |||
| location claims is both a validation on the UA's reliability as well | location claims is both a validation on the UA's reliability as well | |||
| as the trustworthiness of the Finders. Other than providing data to | as the trustworthiness of the Finders. Other than providing data to | |||
| allow for multilateration, this SDSP feature is out of scope of this | allow for multilateration, this SDSP feature is out of scope of this | |||
| document. This function is limited by the location accuracy for both | document. This function is limited by the location accuracy for both | |||
| the Finders and UA. | the Finders and UA. | |||
| 1.1. Draft Status | 1.2. Draft Status | |||
| This draft is still incomplete. New features are being added as | This draft is still incomplete. New features are being added as | |||
| capabilities are researched. The actual message formats also still | capabilities are researched. The actual message formats also still | |||
| need work. | need work. | |||
| 2. Terms and Definitions | 2. Terms and Definitions | |||
| 2.1. Requirements Terminology | 2.1. Requirements Terminology | |||
| The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
| skipping to change at page 6, line 35 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 4 ¶ | |||
| to, the FAA's Air Traffic Management (ATM) system. | to, the FAA's Air Traffic Management (ATM) system. | |||
| USS: | USS: | |||
| UAS Service Supplier. Provide UTM services to support the UAS | UAS Service Supplier. Provide UTM services to support the UAS | |||
| community, to connect Operators and other entities to enable | community, to connect Operators and other entities to enable | |||
| information flow across the USS network, and to promote shared | information flow across the USS network, and to promote shared | |||
| situational awareness among UTM participants. (From FAA UTM | situational awareness among UTM participants. (From FAA UTM | |||
| ConOps V1, May 2018). | ConOps V1, May 2018). | |||
| 3. Problem Space | 3. Problem Space | |||
| 3.1. Meeting the needs of Network Remote ID | 3.1. Meeting the needs of Network Remote ID | |||
| The Federal (US) Aviation Authority (FAA), in the January 2021 Remote | The USA Federal Aviation Authority (FAA), in the January 2021 Remote | |||
| ID Final rule [FAA-FR], has postponed Network Remote ID (N-RID) and | ID Final rule [FAA-FR], postponed Network Remote ID (N-RID) and | |||
| focused on Broadcast Remote ID for now. This was in response to the | focused on Broadcast Remote ID. This was in response to the UAS | |||
| UAS vendors comments that N-RID places considerable demands on | vendors comments that N-RID places considerable demands on then | |||
| currently used UAS. | currently used UAS. | |||
| However, N-RID, or equivalent, is necessary for UTM and knowing what | However, N-RID, or equivalent, is necessary for UTM and knowing what | |||
| soon may be in an airspace. A method that proxies B-RID into UTM can | soon may be in an airspace. A method that proxies B-RID into UTM can | |||
| function as an interim approach to N-RID and continue as a adjunct to | function as an interim approach to N-RID and continue as a adjunct to | |||
| N-RID. | N-RID. | |||
| 3.2. Advantages of Broadcast Remote ID | 3.2. Advantages of Broadcast Remote ID | |||
| B-RID has its advantages over N-RID. | B-RID has its advantages over N-RID. | |||
| skipping to change at page 7, line 29 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 45 ¶ | |||
| 3.3. Trustworthiness of Proxied Data | 3.3. Trustworthiness of Proxied Data | |||
| When a proxy is introduced in any communication protocol, there is a | When a proxy is introduced in any communication protocol, there is a | |||
| risk of corrupted data and DOS attacks. | risk of corrupted data and DOS attacks. | |||
| The Finders, in their role as proxies for B-RID, are authenticated to | The Finders, in their role as proxies for B-RID, are authenticated to | |||
| the SDSP (see Section 4). The SDSP can compare the information from | the SDSP (see Section 4). The SDSP can compare the information from | |||
| multiple Finders to isolate a Finder sending fraudulent information. | multiple Finders to isolate a Finder sending fraudulent information. | |||
| SDSPs can additionally verify authenticated messages that follow | SDSPs can additionally verify authenticated messages that follow | |||
| [tmrid-auth]. | [drip-authentication]. | |||
| The SPDP can manage the number of Finders in an area (see | The SPDP can manage the number of Finders in an area (see | |||
| Section 4.2) to limit DOS attacks from a group of clustered Finders. | Section 4.3) to limit DOS attacks from a group of clustered Finders. | |||
| 3.4. Defense against fraudulent RID Messages | 3.4. Defense against fraudulent RID Messages | |||
| The strongest defense against fraudulent RID messages is to focus on | The strongest defense against fraudulent RID messages is to focus on | |||
| [tmrid-auth] conforming messages. Unless this behavior is mandated, | [drip-authentication] conforming messages. Unless this behavior is | |||
| SPDPs will have to use assorted algorithms to isolate messages of | mandated, SPDPs will have to use assorted algorithms to isolate | |||
| questionable content. | messages of questionable content. | |||
| 4. The Finder - SDSP Security Relationship | 4. The Finder - SDSP Security Relationship | |||
| The SDSP(s) and Finders SHOULD use EDDSA [RFC8032] keys as their | The SDSP(s) and Finders SHOULD use EDDSA [RFC8032] keys as their | |||
| trusted Identities. The public keys SHOULD be registered | trusted Identities. The public keys SHOULD be registered | |||
| Hierarchical HITS, [hierarchical-hit] and [hhit-registries]. | Hierarchical HITS, [I-D.ietf-drip-rid] and | |||
| [I-D.ietf-drip-registries]. Other similar methods may be used. | ||||
| During this registration, the Finder gets the SDSP's EdDSA Public | ||||
| Key. These Public Keys allow for the following options for | ||||
| authenticated messaging from the Finder to the SDSP. | ||||
| The SDSP uses some process (out of scope here) to register the | The SDSP uses some process (out of scope here) to register the | |||
| Finders and their EDDSA Public Key. During this registration, the | Finders and their EDDSA Public Key. During this registration, the | |||
| Finder gets the SDSP's EDDSA Public Key. These Public Keys allow for | Finder gets the SDSP's EDDSA Public Key. These Public Keys allow for | |||
| the following options for authenticated messaging from the Finder to | the following options for authenticated messaging from the Finder to | |||
| the SDSP. | the SDSP. | |||
| 1. ECIES can be used with a unique nonce to authenticate each | 1. ECIES can be used with a unique nonce to authenticate each | |||
| message sent from a Finder to the SDSP. | message sent from a Finder to the SDSP. | |||
| 2. ECIES can be used at the start of some period (e.g. day) to | 2. ECIES can be used at the start of some period (e.g. day) to | |||
| establish a shared secret that is then used to authenticate each | establish a shared secret that is then used to authenticate each | |||
| message sent from a Finder to the SDSP sent during that period. | message sent from a Finder to the SDSP sent during that period. | |||
| 3. HIPv2 [RFC7401] can be used to establish a session secret that is | 3. HIP [RFC7401] can be used to establish a session secret that is | |||
| then used with ESP [RFC4303] to authenticate each message sent | then used with ESP [RFC4303] to authenticate each message sent | |||
| from a Finder to the SDSP. | from a Finder to the SDSP. | |||
| 4. DTLS [RFC5238] can be used to establish a secure connection that | 4. DTLS [RFC5238] can be used to establish a secure connection that | |||
| is then used to authenticate each message sent from a Finder to | is then used to authenticate each message sent from a Finder to | |||
| the SDSP. | the SDSP. | |||
| 4.1. The Finder Map | 4.1. SDSP Heartbeats | |||
| If a 1-way messaging approach is used (e.g. not TCP-based), the SDSP | ||||
| SHOULD send a heartbeat at some periodicity to the Finders so that | ||||
| they get confirmation that their is a receiver of their | ||||
| transmissions. | ||||
| A simple (see Section 6.6) message that identifies the SDSP is sent | ||||
| to the Finder per some published }policy of the SDSP. For example, | ||||
| at the first reception by the SDSP for the day, then the 1st for the | ||||
| hour. It is NOT recommended for the SDSP to send a heartbeat for | ||||
| every message received, as this is a potential DOS attack against the | ||||
| SDSP. | ||||
| 4.2. The Finder Map | ||||
| The Finders are regularly providing their SDSP with their location. | The Finders are regularly providing their SDSP with their location. | |||
| This is through the B-RID Proxy Messages and Finder Location Update | This is through the B-RID Proxy Messages and Finder Location Update | |||
| Messages. With this information, the SDSP can maintain a monitoring | Messages. With this information, the SDSP can maintain a monitoring | |||
| map. That is a map of where there Finder coverage. | map. That is a map of where there Finder coverage. | |||
| 4.2. Managing Finders | 4.3. Managing Finders | |||
| Finder density will vary over time and space. For example, sidewalks | Finder density will vary over time and space. For example, sidewalks | |||
| outside an urban train station can be packed with pedestrians at rush | outside an urban train station can be packed with pedestrians at rush | |||
| hour, either coming or going to their commute trains. An SDSP may | hour, either coming or going to their commute trains. An SDSP may | |||
| want to proactively limit the number of active Finders in such | want to proactively limit the number of active Finders in such | |||
| situations. | situations. | |||
| Using the Finder mapping feature, the SDSP can instruct Finders to | Using the Finder mapping feature, the SDSP can instruct Finders to | |||
| NOT proxy B-RID messages. These Finders will continue to report | NOT proxy B-RID messages. These Finders will continue to report | |||
| their location and through that reporting, the SDSP can instruct them | their location and through that reporting, the SDSP can instruct them | |||
| skipping to change at page 9, line 18 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 13 ¶ | |||
| around a high value site like an airport or large public venue. | around a high value site like an airport or large public venue. | |||
| 5.1. GPS Inaccuracy | 5.1. GPS Inaccuracy | |||
| Single-band, consumer grade, GPS on small platforms is not accurate, | Single-band, consumer grade, GPS on small platforms is not accurate, | |||
| particularly for altitude. Longitude/latitude measurements can | particularly for altitude. Longitude/latitude measurements can | |||
| easily be off by 3M based on satellite postion and clock accuracy. | easily be off by 3M based on satellite postion and clock accuracy. | |||
| Altitude accuracy is reported in product spec sheets and actual tests | Altitude accuracy is reported in product spec sheets and actual tests | |||
| to be 3x less accurate. Altitude accuracy is hindered by ionosphere | to be 3x less accurate. Altitude accuracy is hindered by ionosphere | |||
| activity. In fact, there are studies of ionospheric events (e.g. | activity. In fact, there are studies of ionospheric events (e.g. | |||
| 2015 St. Patrick's day Thus where a UA reports it is rarely accurate, | 2015 St. Patrick's day [gps-ionosphere]) as measured by GPS devices | |||
| but may be accurate enough to map to visual sightings of single | at known locations. | |||
| UA.[gps-ionosphere]) as measured by GPS devices at known locations. | Thus where a UA reports it is rarely accurate, but may be accurate | |||
| enough to map to visual sightings of single UA. | ||||
| Smartphones and particulary smartwatches are plagued with the same | Smartphones and particulary smartwatches are plagued with the same | |||
| challenge, though some of these can combine other information like | challenge, though some of these can combine other information like | |||
| cell tower data to improve location accuracy. FCC E911 accuracy, by | cell tower data to improve location accuracy. FCC E911 accuracy, by | |||
| FCC rules is NOT available to non-E911 applications due to privacy | FCC rules is NOT available to non-E911 applications due to privacy | |||
| concerns, but general higher accuracy is found on some smart devices | concerns, but general higher accuracy is found on some smart devices | |||
| than reported for consumer UA. The SDSP MAY have information on the | than reported for consumer UA. The SDSP MAY have information on the | |||
| Finder location accuracy that it can use in calculating the accuracy | Finder location accuracy that it can use in calculating the accuracy | |||
| of a multilaterated location value. When the Finders are fixed | of a multilaterated location value. When the Finders are fixed | |||
| assets, the SDSP may have very high trust in their location for | assets, the SDSP may have very high trust in their location for | |||
| trusting the multilateration calculation over the UA reported | trusting the multilateration calculation over the UA reported | |||
| location. | location. | |||
| 6. The CS-RID Messages | 6. The CS-RID Messages | |||
| The CS-RID messages between the Finders and the SDSPs primarily | The CS-RID messages between the Finders and the SDSPs primarily | |||
| support the proxy role of the Finders in forwarding the B-RID | support the proxy role of the Finders in forwarding the B-RID | |||
| messages. There are also Finder registration and status messages. | messages. There are also Finder registration and status messages. | |||
| CS-RID information is represented in CBOR [RFC7049]. The CDDL | CS-RID information is represented in CBOR [RFC7049]. The CDDL | |||
| [RFC8610] specification is used for CS-RID message description | [RFC8610] specification is used for CS-RID message description. | |||
| CS-RID MAC and COAP [RFC7252] for the CS-RID protocol. | ||||
| The following is a general representation of the content in the CS- | The following is a general representation of the content in the CS- | |||
| RID messages. | RID messages. | |||
| ( | ( | |||
| CS-RID MESSAGE TYPE, | CS-RID MESSAGE TYPE, | |||
| CS-RID MESSAGE CONTENT, | CS-RID MESSAGE CONTENT, | |||
| CS-RID MAC | CS-RID MAC | |||
| ) | ) | |||
| skipping to change at page 10, line 24 ¶ | skipping to change at page 11, line 16 ¶ | |||
| The CS-RID MESSAGE TYPE is defined in Figure 1: | The CS-RID MESSAGE TYPE is defined in Figure 1: | |||
| Number CS-RID Message Type | Number CS-RID Message Type | |||
| ------ ----------------- | ------ ----------------- | |||
| 0 Reserved | 0 Reserved | |||
| 1 B-RID Forwarding | 1 B-RID Forwarding | |||
| 2 Finder Registration | 2 Finder Registration | |||
| 3 SDSP Response | 3 SDSP Response | |||
| 4 Finder Location | 4 Finder Location | |||
| 5 SDSP Heartbeat | ||||
| Figure 1 | Figure 1 | |||
| 6.1.1. CDDL description for CS-RID message type | 6.1.1. CDDL description for CS-RID message type | |||
| The overall CS-RID CDDL description is structured in Figure 2. | The overall CS-RID CDDL description is structured in Figure 2. | |||
| CSRID_Object = { | CSRID_Object = { | |||
| application-context, | application-context, | |||
| info => info_message, | info => info_message, | |||
| skipping to change at page 14, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at page 14, line 31 ¶ | |||
| VHF : 6, | VHF : 6, | |||
| UHF : 7, | UHF : 7, | |||
| SHF : 8, | SHF : 8, | |||
| EHF : 9, | EHF : 9, | |||
| ) | ) | |||
| gps-coordinates = [ | gps-coordinates = [ | |||
| latitude : float, | latitude : float, | |||
| longitude: float, | longitude: float, | |||
| ] | ] | |||
| Figure 5 | Figure 5 | |||
| 6.3. CS-RID Finder Registration | 6.3. CS-RID Finder Registration | |||
| The CS-RID Finder MAY use HIPv2 [RFC7401] with the SDSP to establish | The CS-RID Finder MAY use [RFC7401](#RFC7401) with the SDSP to | |||
| a Security Association and a shared secret to use for the CS-RID MAC | establish a Security Association and a shared secret to use for the | |||
| generation. In this approach, the HIPv2 mobility functionality and | CS-RID MAC generation. In this approach, the HIP mobility | |||
| ESP [RFC4303] support are not used. | functionality and [RFC4303][RFC4303] support are not used. | |||
| When HIPv2 is used as above, the Finder Registration is a SDSP "wake | When HIP is used as above, the Finder Registration is a SDSP "wake | |||
| up". It is sent prior to the Finder sending any proxied B-RID | up". It is sent prior to the Finder sending any proxied B-RID | |||
| messages to ensure that the SDSP is able to receive and process the | messages to ensure that the SDSP is able to receive and process the | |||
| messages. | messages. | |||
| In this usage, the CS-RID is the Finder HIT. If the SDSP has lost | In this usage, the CS-RID ID is the Finder HIT. If the SDSP has lost | |||
| state with the Finder, it initiates the HIP exchange with the Finder | state with the Finder, it initiates the HIP exchange with the Finder | |||
| to reestablish HIP state and a new shared secret for the CS-RID B-RID | to reestablish HIP state and a new shared secret for the CS-RID B-RID | |||
| Proxy Messages. In this case the Finder Registration Message is: | Proxy Messages. In this case the Finder Registration Message is: | |||
| ( | ( | |||
| CS-RID MESSAGE TYPE, | CS-RID MESSAGE TYPE, | |||
| CS-RID ID, | CS-RID ID, | |||
| CS-RID TIMESTAMP, | CS-RID TIMESTAMP, | |||
| CS-RID GPS, | CS-RID GPS, | |||
| CS-RID MAC | CS-RID MAC | |||
| skipping to change at page 16, line 27 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 4 ¶ | |||
| CS-RID MESSAGE TYPE, | CS-RID MESSAGE TYPE, | |||
| CS-RID ID, | CS-RID ID, | |||
| CS-RID TIMESTAMP, | CS-RID TIMESTAMP, | |||
| CS-RID GPS, | CS-RID GPS, | |||
| CS-RID MAC | CS-RID MAC | |||
| ) | ) | |||
| 6.5.1. CDDL description for Location Update | 6.5.1. CDDL description for Location Update | |||
| The CDDL for CS-RID Location update is defined in Figure 8 | The CDDL for CS-RID Location update is defined in Figure 8 | |||
| location_update_message = { | location_update_message = { | |||
| common_message_members, | common_message_members, | |||
| rid => tstr, | rid => tstr, | |||
| timestamp => tdate, | timestamp => tdate, | |||
| gps => gps-coordinates, | gps => gps-coordinates, | |||
| } | } | |||
| gps-coordinates = [ | gps-coordinates = [ | |||
| latitude : float, | latitude : float, | |||
| longitude: float, | longitude: float, | |||
| ] | ] | |||
| Figure 8 | Figure 8 | |||
| 6.6. SDSP Heartbeat | ||||
| TBD | ||||
| 7. The Full CS-RID CDDL specification | 7. The Full CS-RID CDDL specification | |||
| <CODE BEGINS> | <CODE BEGINS> | |||
| ; CDDL specification for Crowd source RID | ; CDDL specification for Crowd source RID | |||
| ; It specifies a collection of CS message types | ; It specifies a collection of CS message types | |||
| ; | ; | |||
| ; | ; | |||
| ; The CSRID overall data structure | ; The CSRID overall data structure | |||
| skipping to change at page 20, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 20, line 45 ¶ | |||
| May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. | May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. | |||
| [RFC8610] Birkholz, H., Vigano, C., and C. Bormann, "Concise Data | [RFC8610] Birkholz, H., Vigano, C., and C. Bormann, "Concise Data | |||
| Definition Language (CDDL): A Notational Convention to | Definition Language (CDDL): A Notational Convention to | |||
| Express Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) and | Express Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) and | |||
| JSON Data Structures", RFC 8610, DOI 10.17487/RFC8610, | JSON Data Structures", RFC 8610, DOI 10.17487/RFC8610, | |||
| June 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8610>. | June 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8610>. | |||
| 10.2. Informative References | 10.2. Informative References | |||
| [drip-authentication] | ||||
| Wiethuechter, A., Card, S., and R. Moskowitz, "DRIP | ||||
| Authentication Formats & Protocols for Broadcast Remote | ||||
| ID", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-drip- | ||||
| auth-09, 30 April 2022, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/ | ||||
| draft-ietf-drip-auth-09.txt>. | ||||
| [F3411-19] ASTM International, "Standard Specification for Remote ID | [F3411-19] ASTM International, "Standard Specification for Remote ID | |||
| and Tracking", February 2020, | and Tracking", February 2020, | |||
| <http://www.astm.org/cgi-bin/resolver.cgi?F3411>. | <http://www.astm.org/cgi-bin/resolver.cgi?F3411>. | |||
| [FAA-FR] United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), "FAA | [FAA-FR] United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), "FAA | |||
| Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft", January 2021, | Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft", January 2021, | |||
| <https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-15/ | <https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-15/ | |||
| pdf/2020-28948.pdf>. | pdf/2020-28948.pdf>. | |||
| [gps-ionosphere] | [gps-ionosphere] | |||
| skipping to change at page 20, line 45 ¶ | skipping to change at page 21, line 33 ¶ | |||
| 2020, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-moskowitz- | 2020, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-moskowitz- | |||
| hip-hhit-registries-02.txt>. | hip-hhit-registries-02.txt>. | |||
| [hierarchical-hit] | [hierarchical-hit] | |||
| Moskowitz, R., Card, S. W., and A. Wiethuechter, | Moskowitz, R., Card, S. W., and A. Wiethuechter, | |||
| "Hierarchical HITs for HIPv2", Work in Progress, Internet- | "Hierarchical HITs for HIPv2", Work in Progress, Internet- | |||
| Draft, draft-moskowitz-hip-hierarchical-hit-05, 13 May | Draft, draft-moskowitz-hip-hierarchical-hit-05, 13 May | |||
| 2020, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-moskowitz- | 2020, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-moskowitz- | |||
| hip-hierarchical-hit-05.txt>. | hip-hierarchical-hit-05.txt>. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-drip-registries] | ||||
| Wiethuechter, A., Card, S., Moskowitz, R., and J. Reid, | ||||
| "DRIP Entity Tag Registration & Lookup", Work in Progress, | ||||
| Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-drip-registries-02, 30 April | ||||
| 2022, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-drip- | ||||
| registries-02.txt>. | ||||
| [I-D.ietf-drip-rid] | ||||
| Moskowitz, R., Card, S. W., Wiethuechter, A., and A. | ||||
| Gurtov, "DRIP Entity Tag (DET) for Unmanned Aircraft | ||||
| System Remote ID (UAS RID)", Work in Progress, Internet- | ||||
| Draft, draft-ietf-drip-rid-24, 24 April 2022, | ||||
| <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-drip-rid- | ||||
| 24.txt>. | ||||
| [RFC4303] Kent, S., "IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)", | [RFC4303] Kent, S., "IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)", | |||
| RFC 4303, DOI 10.17487/RFC4303, December 2005, | RFC 4303, DOI 10.17487/RFC4303, December 2005, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4303>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4303>. | |||
| [RFC5238] Phelan, T., "Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) over | [RFC5238] Phelan, T., "Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) over | |||
| the Datagram Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP)", | the Datagram Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP)", | |||
| RFC 5238, DOI 10.17487/RFC5238, May 2008, | RFC 5238, DOI 10.17487/RFC5238, May 2008, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5238>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5238>. | |||
| [RFC7049] Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object | [RFC7049] Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object | |||
| skipping to change at page 21, line 24 ¶ | skipping to change at page 22, line 29 ¶ | |||
| [RFC7401] Moskowitz, R., Ed., Heer, T., Jokela, P., and T. | [RFC7401] Moskowitz, R., Ed., Heer, T., Jokela, P., and T. | |||
| Henderson, "Host Identity Protocol Version 2 (HIPv2)", | Henderson, "Host Identity Protocol Version 2 (HIPv2)", | |||
| RFC 7401, DOI 10.17487/RFC7401, April 2015, | RFC 7401, DOI 10.17487/RFC7401, April 2015, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7401>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7401>. | |||
| [RFC8032] Josefsson, S. and I. Liusvaara, "Edwards-Curve Digital | [RFC8032] Josefsson, S. and I. Liusvaara, "Edwards-Curve Digital | |||
| Signature Algorithm (EdDSA)", RFC 8032, | Signature Algorithm (EdDSA)", RFC 8032, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC8032, January 2017, | DOI 10.17487/RFC8032, January 2017, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8032>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8032>. | |||
| [tmrid-auth] | ||||
| Wiethuechter, A., Card, S. W., and R. Moskowitz, "TM-RID | ||||
| Authentication Formats", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, | ||||
| draft-wiethuechter-tmrid-auth-05, 18 February 2020, | ||||
| <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-wiethuechter-tmrid- | ||||
| auth-05.txt>. | ||||
| Appendix A. Using LIDAR for UA location | Appendix A. Using LIDAR for UA location | |||
| If the Finder has LIDAR or similar detection equipment (e.g. on a | If the Finder has LIDAR or similar detection equipment (e.g. on a | |||
| connected car) that has full sky coverage, the Finder can use this | connected car) that has full sky coverage, the Finder can use this | |||
| equipment to locate UAs in its airspace. The Finder would then be | equipment to locate UAs in its airspace. The Finder would then be | |||
| able to detect non-participating UAs. A non-participating UA is one | able to detect non-participating UAs. A non-participating UA is one | |||
| that the Finder can "see" with the LIDAR, but not "hear" any B-RID | that the Finder can "see" with the LIDAR, but not "hear" any B-RID | |||
| messages. | messages. | |||
| These Finders would then take the LIDAR data, construct appropriate | These Finders would then take the LIDAR data, construct appropriate | |||
| skipping to change at page 22, line 26 ¶ | skipping to change at page 23, line 23 ¶ | |||
| The Crowd Sourcing idea in this document came from the Apple "Find My | The Crowd Sourcing idea in this document came from the Apple "Find My | |||
| Device" presentation at the International Association for | Device" presentation at the International Association for | |||
| Cryptographic Research's Real World Crypto 2020 conference. | Cryptographic Research's Real World Crypto 2020 conference. | |||
| Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
| Robert Moskowitz | Robert Moskowitz | |||
| HTT Consulting | HTT Consulting | |||
| Oak Park, MI 48237 | Oak Park, MI 48237 | |||
| United States of America | United States of America | |||
| Email: rgm@labs.htt-consult.com | Email: rgm@labs.htt-consult.com | |||
| Stuart W. Card | Stuart W. Card | |||
| AX Enterprize | AX Enterprize | |||
| 4947 Commercial Drive | 4947 Commercial Drive | |||
| Yorkville, NY 13495 | Yorkville, NY 13495 | |||
| United States of America | United States of America | |||
| Email: stu.card@axenterprize.com | Email: stu.card@axenterprize.com | |||
| Adam Wiethuechter | Adam Wiethuechter | |||
| AX Enterprize | AX Enterprize | |||
| 4947 Commercial Drive | 4947 Commercial Drive | |||
| Yorkville, NY 13495 | Yorkville, NY 13495 | |||
| United States of America | United States of America | |||
| Email: adam.wiethuechter@axenterprize.com | Email: adam.wiethuechter@axenterprize.com | |||
| Shuai Zhao | Shuai Zhao | |||
| Tencent | Intel | |||
| 2747 Park Blvd | 2200 Mission College Blvd | |||
| Palo Alto, CA 94306 | Santa Clara, CA 95054 | |||
| United States of America | United States of America | |||
| Email: shuai.zhao@ieee.org | Email: shuai.zhao@ieee.org | |||
| Henk Birkholz | Henk Birkholz | |||
| Fraunhofer SIT | Fraunhofer SIT | |||
| Rheinstrasse 75 | Rheinstrasse 75 | |||
| 64295 Darmstadt | 64295 Darmstadt | |||
| Germany | Germany | |||
| Email: henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de | Email: henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de | |||
| End of changes. 50 change blocks. | ||||
| 96 lines changed or deleted | 142 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||