Re: URN Namespace Registration Request for "PNO"
"Steindl, Guenter" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.urn |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <PR3PR10MB40299B1911F1D947DC8F66D7E6092@PR3PR10MB4029.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> |
Hi Peter,
Is it possible to say more at this time about the format of PNO URNs? In general, we like to see as much detail as possible when registering new namespaces.
PNO (https://www.profibus.com/pi-organization/about-pi) is working together with SDOs (IEC, IEEE, DKE, ...) for more than 30 years.
PNO is the host for technologies like PROFIBUS, PROFINET, OMLOX, IO-Link, MTP, ...
Thus, the principal structure will be
urn:pno:profibus:{identifier}
urn:pno:profinet:{identifier}
...
The technologies themselves will have to define the structure "behind" their identifier.
Example for Profinet:
Table 1102 – URN values for identifying an end station
Name
Values
Meaning
NID
"pno"
Constant according to this specification.
NSS
profinet:uci/v1"
Constant according to this specification.
q-component
List of keyword values pair with the format,
keyword=value.
Keywords are:
"VendorID",
"OrderID",
"IM_Serial_Number",
"IM_Hardware_Revision"
Values according to the corresponding I&M0 data
Example:
urn:pno:profinet:uci/v1?=VendorID=0xFFFF
&OrderID=ABCDEF&IM_Serial_Number=12345&IM_Hardware_Revision=0x0001
It seems perhaps that this registration request is forward-looking: PNO feels the need to register the namespace before it can be confident about including such URNs in its specifications, but those specifications have not yet been written so PNO cannot yet say what the format of the URNs will be. Is this an accurate statement?
Some of the specifications (e.g. PROFINET) are updated every year (every May) - knowing that their IEC version will only be updated every 3 to 5 years!
Regards
Günter
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Gesendet: Montag, 15. April 2024 02:06
An: Steindl, Günter (DI FA CTR ICO) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Betreff: Re: [urn] URN Namespace Registration Request for "PNO"
Thank you for this registration request. Comments inline.
On 4/8/24 5:15 AM, Steindl, Guenter wrote:
> 3. Guidelines for URN Structure:
>
> - URNs within the "pno" namespace will follow the following structure:
>
> urn:pno:{identifier}
>
> Where {identifier} is a unique string that identifies a specific
> resource within the namespace. The format and content of the
> {identifier} will be determined by PROFIBUS Nutzerorganisation e.V.
> (PNO) / PROFIBUS & PROFINET International (PI) and may include
> alphanumeric characters, hyphens, underscores, and other allowed characters.
Is it possible to say more at this time about the format of PNO URNs? In general, we like to see as much detail as possible when registering new namespaces.
> 4. Additional Information
>
> This URN will be part of future standardization efforts of e.g.
> “PROFINET” as part of the IEC61158/IEC61784 at the IEC.
It seems perhaps that this registration request is forward-looking: PNO feels the need to register the namespace before it can be confident about including such URNs in its specifications, but those specifications have not yet been written so PNO cannot yet say what the format of the URNs will be. Is this an accurate statement?
Peter
_______________________________________________
urn mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn