Information Object Class (ASN.1)
This article has multiple issues. Please help or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
|
ASN.1 Information Object Class is a concept widely used in ASN.1 specifications to address issues related to protocol specification similar to issues addressed by CORBA/IDL specifications.
Information Object Classes are used for example to specify ROSE (Remote Operations Service Element) protocol in ASN.1.
Abbreviations[]
Abbreviations used throughout this article:
- ASN.1
- Abstract Syntax Notation One
- IOC
- IOS
- IO
- SQL
- Structured Query Language
- PER
- Packed Encoding Rules
- BER
- Basic Encoding Rules
- IDL
- Interface Definition Language
- CORBA
- Common Object Request Broker Architecture
- IIOP
- Internet Inter-ORB Protocol
Introduction[]
The simplest way of thinking of ASN.1 Information Object Classes is to regard them as a way to represent IDL specification in ASN.1 using concepts derived from the relational databases theory and SQL syntax in particular.
The concepts used in ASN.1 are more flexible than the ones used in IDL, because, continuing the analogy, they allow to "customize grammar" of the "IDL specification". ASN.1 encoding rules are used as a transfer syntax for remote invocations that resemble CORBA/IIOP.
In the light of this comparison, we can draw an approximate analogy between concepts used in Information Object Classes and SQL and IDL concepts as shown in Table 1.
ASN.1 term | Analogy in SQL | Analogy in IDL | |
---|---|---|---|
Information Object Class (IOC) |
SQL table structure descriptor (CREATE TABLE statement) |
IDL grammar specification (BNF rules) | |
IOC field declaration |
SQL table column descriptor in CREATE TABLE statement (type of a column) |
IDL grammar production | |
Information Object (IO) |
SQL table row (INSERT INTO statement) |
IDL operation declaration | |
IO field definition |
Cell of SQL table row in INSERT INTO statement (cell value) |
Portion of IDL operation declaration, typically related to declaration of an operation type code, parameter list, operation return value, or list of exceptions | |
Information Object Set (IOS) (collection of Information Objects) |
Completely defined SQL table (collection of rows) (see Note 1) |
IDL interface definition (collection of operations) | |
ASN.1 data type using references to IOC fields parameterized with IOS (typically a collection of semantically related types designating request, response, and exception, all parameterized with the same IOS) |
- |
High-level format (grammar specification) of a frame (marshalling buffer) carrying CORBA request, response, or exception | |
ASN.1 encoding rules and transfer syntaxes (BER, PER) |
- |
Low-level encoding of requests, responses and exception indicators suitable for physical transfer over the medium | |
Note 1. The analogy between IOS and an SQL table is not quite correct. SQL permits only one instance of a table of given type (OPERATION in the example below), while ASN.1 permits multiple Information Object Sets derived from the same Information Object Class, what should be most correctly related to multiple instances of the same table in terms of SQL (OPERATION in the example below). |
Analogy by example[]
Table 2 illustrates by example correspondence of ASN.1 concepts to similar constructs found in SQL and IDL.
ASN.1 term | ASN.1 example | Analogy in SQL | Analogy in IDL |
---|---|---|---|
IOC |
OPERATION ::= CLASS
{
&operationCode INTEGER UNIQUE,
&InvocationParsType,
&ResponseParsAndResultType,
&ExceptionList ERROR OPTIONAL
}
|
CREATE TABLE OPERATION
(
operationCode integer not null unique,
InvocationParsType type_info not null,
ResponseParsAndResultType type_info not null,
ExceptionList ref_to_table(ERROR)
)
(See Note 1 explaining |
This is approximately analogous to a portion of BNF description of some pseudo-IDL syntax of the following form (note that in subsequent examples we will be using real IDL syntax rather than the imaginary one defined by the BNF below): OPERATION ::= operationCode InvocationParsType ResponseParsAndResultType ExceptionList
operationCode ::= Integer
InvocationParsType ::= Type
ResponseParsAndResultType ::= Type
ExceptionList ::= ERROR
where |
IO |
getCustomersNum OPERATION ::=
{
&operationCode get-customers-num-op-type-code,
&InvocationParsType Get-customers-num-req-pars-type,
&ResponseParsAndResultType Get-customers-num-ind-pars-type,
&ExceptionList { wrong-product | wrong-department }
}
|
INSERT INTO OPERATION VALUES ( $get_customers_num_op_type_code, Get_customers_num_req_pars_type, Get_customers_num_ind_pars_type, Get_customers_num_exc_list )
(Tokens starting with $ are regarded as a variable (e.g. in PHP) and they shall be substituted with a real variable value.) |
MyType1 getCustomersNum(
in MyType2 par1,
inout MyType3 par2,
out MyType4 par3)
raises (ExcType1, ExcType2);
|
IOS |
MyWarehouseOps OPERATION ::=
{
getCustomersNum |
getPiecesNum |
appendItem
}
|
SQL table defined using a sequence of INSERT statements. |
IDL interface (collection of operations). |
ASN.1 data types |
Request ::= SEQUENCE
{
invokeId INTEGER,
opcode OPERATION. &operationCode ({MyWarehouseOps}),
req-pars OPERATION. &InvocationParsType ({MyWarehouseOps} {@opcode})
}
Response ::= SEQUENCE
{
invokeId INTEGER,
opcode OPERATION. &operationCode ({MyWarehouseOps}),
rsp-pars OPERATION. &ResponseParsAndResultType ({MyWarehouseOps} {@opcode})
}
Exception ::= SEQUENCE
{
err-code ERROR. &errorCode ({MyErrorSet}),
err-body ERROR. &ErrorBody ({MyErrorSet} {@err-code})
}
(See Notes 2, 3.) |
- |
High-level format of a frame carrying CORBA request, response, or exception. |
BER, PER etc. |
0110 0111 0010 110... |
- |
Low-level encoding of requests, responses and exception indicators. |
Note 1. The The The Note 2. The @ notation (e.g. Note 3. The example specification of ASN.1 data types does not define any formal correspondence between Therefore, the example specification does not formally enforce any message sequence scenarios. Unlike IDL operation definition, the correspondence between frames is non-binding and is purely semantical, although it can be exploited by an ASN.1 tool in a tool-specific fashion. |
Parameterization[]
If you carefully examine the ASN.1 example presented in Table 2 and compare it to IDL concepts, you will see one important limitation on the ASN.1 side.
Our example ASN.1 data types which we agreed to compare to a high-level CORBA/IDL transfer syntax specification are limited to definition of such transfer syntax only for a single instance of what we compared to an IDL interface (Information Object Set in ASN.1 terms).
In other words, such transfer syntax is not generic and it is not reusable.
With the current set of known tools you can't define such a transfer syntax in a generic way in, say, ASN.1 specification A and then reuse it in ASN.1 specifications B and C that define concrete application-specific "IDL interfaces" on which A does not depend.
The reason for the current limitation is that we currently hard-code our Information Object Set (MyWarehouseOps
in case of OPERATION
, or MyErrorSet
in case of ERROR
) into our ASN.1 data types (high-level transfer syntax specification).
Now we need to make one last step to have a complete and fully functioning system. We need to introduce a concept of type parameterization using Information Object Set as a type formal parameter.
Here is our Request
type rewritten with the concept of parameterization in mind:
Request {OPERATION : OpSet} ::= SEQUENCE { invokeId INTEGER, opcode OPERATION.&operationCode ({OpSet}), req-pars OPERATION.&InvocationParsType ({OpSet} {@opcode}) }
Now the high-level transfer syntax descriptor Request
can be parameterized with any arbitrary Information Object Set ("IDL interface") conforming to the Information Object Class specification ("IDL grammar").
Therefore, we can now instantiate it for any Information Object Set as follows:
Request1 ::= Request{MyWarehouseOps} Request2 ::= Request{MyOtherSetOfOps} -- etc.
The WITH SYNTAX clause[]
The WITH SYNTAX clause is effectively a tiny grammar language used to express ways of syntactic definitions of Information Objects.
Consider the following example:
OPERATION ::= CLASS { &opcode INTEGER UNIQUE, &InvocationParsType, &ResponseParsAndResultType, &ExceptionList ERROR OPTIONAL } WITH SYNTAX { OPCODE &opcode REQUEST ARGUMENTS &InvocationParsType RESPONSE ARGUMENTS &ResponseParsAndResultType [ERRORS &ExceptionList] }
Enclosure in square brackets ([]) means optionality of syntactic constructs contained in [].
Optionality can be nested.
Tokens all in capital mean keywords, tokens starting with & mean productions requiring substitution of the corresponding entity in place of the token (ASN.1 value, type, or Information Object Set, either instance or reference thereof), depending on the Information Object Class to which this field refers.
Now what we would have otherwise been written as:
getCustomersNum OPERATION ::= { &operationCode get-customers-num-op-type-code, &InvocationParsType Get-customers-num-req-pars-type, &ResponseParsAndResultType Get-customers-num-ind-pars-type, &ExceptionList { wrong-product | wrong-department } }
in the presence of the WITH SYNTAX clause can be rewritten as follows:
getCustomersNum OPERATION ::= { OPCODE get-customers-num-op-type-code, REQUEST ARGUMENTS Get-customers-num-req-pars-type, RESPONSE ARGUMENTS Get-customers-num-ind-pars-type, -- according to BNF in the WITH SYNTAX clause, the following line can be omitted ERRORS { wrong-product | wrong-department } }
To fully understand the grammar concept behind the WITH SYNTAX clause, imagine we wrote our OPERATION Information Object Class definition as follows:
OPERATION ::= CLASS { &opcode INTEGER UNIQUE, &InvocationParsType, &ResponseParsAndResultType, &ExceptionList ERROR OPTIONAL } WITH SYNTAX { &opcode &InvocationParsType &ResponseParsAndResultType [&ExceptionList] }
Then a corresponding Information Object instance for the definition above is to be defined as follows:
getCustomersNum OPERATION ::= { get-customers-num-op-type-code Get-customers-num-req-pars-type Get-customers-num-ind-pars-type { wrong-product | wrong-department } }
See also[]
References[]
- This article uses material from the OpenTTCN Wiki article "Information Object Classes (ASN.1)" licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
External links[]
- ITU-T RECOMMENDATION X.681, Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1): Information object specification
- ASN.1 Made Simple — Advanced Topics from OSS Nokalva
- Data modeling languages