Asset Profile Definitions for DLT Interoperability
draft-sardon-blockchain-interop-asset-profile-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Aetienne Sardon  , Thomas Hardjono  , Benedikt Schuppli 
Last updated 2020-12-30
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Internet Engineering Task Force                                A. Sardon
Internet-Draft                                                  Swisscom
Intended status: Informational                               T. Hardjono
Expires: July 3, 2021                                                MIT
                                                             B. Schuppli
                                                                     FQX
                                                       December 30, 2020

           Asset Profile Definitions for DLT Interoperability
            draft-sardon-blockchain-interop-asset-profile-00

Abstract

   In order for virtual assets to be traded or exchanged within online
   transactions, the parties involved in the transaction must have share
   a common definition of what constitute the virtual asset.  Parties
   transacting on a DLT system must have the unambiguous means to refer
   to a common definition of an virtual asset, independent of the
   implementation of the virtual asset in question.  This specification
   defines a JSON representation of a number of common information
   fields within asset profiles.

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 July 3, 2021.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2020 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

Sardon, et al.            Expires July 3, 2021                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft           Virtual Asset Profiles            December 2020

   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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  The Asset Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  General Operational Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  Common Information Fields and Asset-Specific Extensions . . .   5
     5.1.  Mandatory fields (non-null) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     5.2.  Mandatory fields  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     5.3.  Optional fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     5.4.  Asset-specific Extension fields . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Example: Promissory Note  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Introduction

   In order for virtual assets to be traded or exchanged within online
   transactions, the parties involved in the transaction must have share
   a common definition of what constitute the virtual asset.  This
   requirement is notably acute when a virtual asset is a representation
   of real-world assets (e.g. basket of commodities) because there are
   limitless ways to combine such real-world assets into differing
   virtual asset representations.  Parties transacting on a DLT system
   must have the unambiguous means to refer to a common definition of an
   virtual asset, independent of the implementation of the virtual asset
   in question.  The availability of authoritative definitions of
   virtual assets using a standardized computer-readable format permits
   instances of the asset to be established in different DLT systems
   simultaneously, and permits mobility or transferability of virtual
   asset across different DLT systems.

   In cross-DLT transfers assisted by gateways, the respective gateways
   must have the ability to validate that the originator and beneficiary
   are referring to the same asset profile.  An asset profile may state
   some mechanical restrictions (i.e. can be instantiated on specific
Show full document text