Weekly OpenADE Meeting Notes

Weekly OpenADE Meeting Notes
Tuesday, September 1, 2015

OpenADE Task Force Topics
Green Button Connect My Data Testing and Certification (target fall 2014)  Complete function block descriptions  Complete test case requirements Amend CMD test requirements if gaps are discovered in dry run or other process Issues Raised and Implementation Questions  How to use BR=bulkID with application to account and account groupings, as well as, large ThirdParty collections of Authorizations.  Service Request 83 – including Function Block for optional customer info (service point address, etc.)  Service Request 84 – having scope selection screen on Data Custodian Site vs 3rd Party site (need to write up description)  Service Request 85 – Duplicating TOU and CPP from ReadingType to IntervalReading as in SEP 2.0 Service Request 86 – Desire to add digital signature to Green Button data to protect against tamper.  Service Request 90 – Error in GB TestPlan: FB_07,08 AccumulcationBehavior should be 4  Service Request 91 – Error in Test Plan: FB_04  Mega Third Party  Service Request 92 – Certificate reference Service Request Customers have requested access to the Green Button CMD API interface to access their own account information Enhancement of UsageSummary.CostAdditionalDetail to indicate kind of billing determininant New Resources for OpenADE Exchange requested Tariff Model Resource  Customer Information Resource

Topics sftp for Batch/Bulk/{bulkId}
Is there a “user”?  Suggestion – fixed user= “GreenButton” so no PII in sftp startup Alternative – let DC provide arbitrary uuid in the notification  Conclusion: the DC chooses the “user” and includes it in the notificationUri where the TP gets it for use in the exchange. Target Firm Up end of July: Retailcustomer.xsd  Need to define function blocks -- Potentials:  FB_X1 Minimal that only provides actual IDs and UsagePoints  FB_X2 Service Location Contents Name and Addresses and location, No fb needed now End device No fb needed now Pricing Structure  FB_X3 Account data for DMD access Access Tokens  Access tokens to access? Individual with access_token, bulk with client_access_token URI in Authorization  customerResourceUri needed in OAuth authorization response and Authorization xml structure  customerResourceUri in client access Authorization would be batch/BulkRetailCustomerInfo  Test requirements – If Scope has RetailCustomer function blocks, then Verify Authorization has customerResourceUri Verify Oauth response has customerResourceUri Verify client_access_token works for esource/Batch/BulkRetailCustomerInfo Verify access_token works for resource/RetailCustomer… Additional attributes  Move in move out – use CustomerAgreement.validityInterval Target Firm Up List end of July: UsageSummary.CostAdditionalDetail.itemKind Tax, Other, ThirdParty energy provider fee, ThirdParty energy provider usage, Credit, Discount, Usage, Demand, TOU, incentive, informational, Customer Charge, Energy Charges, Supply Charges, Distribution Charges, Transmission Charges, Generation Charges, State Gross Receipts Tax, State Tax Adjustment, Administrative Charge, Ancillary Charge, Balancing Service Charge, Working Capital Charge, Purchased Generation Adjustment, Cost Adjustment, Service Location Distribution Charge, Other, Minimum charge, Tier Charge, Adjustment Charge, Program Charge/Credit, Amount Paid, Power Factor adjustment, DWR energy credit (calculation and credit value), UUT exemption status, State Tax, Local Tax, Transmission Charges, Distribution Charges, Nuclear Decommissioning Charges, Public Purpose Programs Charges, Franchise Fee, Generation Charge Will finish consolidation of list and review OAuth login requirements for the testing

RetailCustomer Architecture
•  API –GET .../resource/Batch/RetailCustomer/{id} –GET .../resource/CustomerInformation/{id} –… –GET .../resource/CustomerInformation/{id}/RetailCustomer/{id}/CustomerAccount/{id}/CustomerAgreement/{id} –GET …/resource/Customer/{id} –GET .../resource/CustomerAgreement/{id} –GET .../resource/Batch/BulkRetailCustomerInfo/{id} Current Architecture PG&E proposal

Large Organization Use Case
Corporate Authorizes EMS Co Resource Example Web Account Safeway Company Customer SF Regional Mgr, Oakland RM Customer Account Individual Stores Service Agreement Gas service, Electrical service Service Point Usage Points EMS Co There is sometimes an authority that can authorize a large number of individual accounts, e.g. gsa/McDonalds, … where the individual accounts may be franchised or otherwise owned/managed – yet the individual accounts have the responsibility to maintain the utility account and pay the bills.

Query Parameters There was a significant discussion, led by Partha, about how the “depth” query parameter should work. During the call we accessed the “Implementation Agreement” and discovered the only documentation of the query parameters is a list of the query parameter keywords. The group agreed we need to document how the parameters work and the expected format they should contain. For example, the date query parameters (published-min, published-max, updated-min, and updated-max) need to indicate they are to be UTC “Z” time formats and not epoch time. As a result of the two above items, additional test need to be added to FB_37 to: Ensure query elements containing epoch time generate a 400 response Ensure query elements containing ALL generate a 400 response Ensure responses match requested max & depth values Jerry Yip has some additional itemKind elements he wants to discuss during next week’s OpenADE Task Force call, which he will provide in a follow up . Jerald Pinnecker wants to discuss “subscriptions” during next week’s OpenADE Task Force call. Presently they send subscription data to a Third Party when they register and he wants to know how that data is then tied to the access token when the Third Party completes the authorization request. Additionally, he wants to know who the Third Party is supposed to use the access token.

OAuth Authorization Failure Mode
Usage Scenario: TP redirect user to DC scope selection. User approves TP and scope. DC redirects user to TP with scope parameter. TP redirects users to DC's OAuth /authorize endpoint with scope and client_id parameters. DC redirects back to TP redirect_uri with OAuth code parameter. TP makes a request to DC's OAuth /token endpoint with the code. DC responds with an access_token and refresh_token. TP's server crashes and doesn't save either token. How is the TP supposed to get new tokens? In normal OAuth, you simply redirect the user back to the OAuth /authorize endpoint, the user approves access again and gets redirected back with a new code. However, at least in one current implementation, the TP has to redirect the user to the scope selection screen, where the user will be told that they have already authorized the TP with no option to re-authorize. In order to get new tokens, the use manually has to cancel authorization, which causes them to get redirected to the main website. Then the user manually has to go back to the scope selection screen and authorize the TP again. This re-authorization process is not ideal because it requires us training the user to cancel-then-manually-go-back-and-reauthorize, which is a very confusing and complex process and doesn't redirect the user back to the TP after cancellation. Two possible solutions: 1. On the DC's scope selection interface, have a re-authorize button if the user has already authorized the TP. 2. Allow TP's to redirect the user to OAuth's /authorize endpoint with the same scope, and have the DC ask for re-authorization at that point. Option 1 is better for GBCMD, in my opinion, because it also allows for the scenario where the TP loses the scope parameter, too. Option 2 is the more technically correct OAuth procedure. All other OAuth services I can think of do Option 2, but they also don't require a pre-defined scope parameter for the /authorize endpoint (so there's nothing to lose).

GET Subscription w/wo query parameters – Default required behaviors
Problem: The amount of data that is in a: GET /Batch/Subscription/{subscriptionId} can potentially be very large. What is the obligation of a DC when that message is received without query parameters? What about the desire of some DC’s to provide only a fixed size response of say “X” months? What about when a subscription contains 1/10/1000 UsagePoints? Alternatives 1) Requires date range in GET /Batch/Subscription/{subscriptionId} DC responds with 202 if data is too large to return right away Returns with notification when data is ready and can provide query distinguished URIs 2) DC decides maximum depth to return when no query parameters TP may get whole history (from scope parameter HistoryLength) or may get less. 3) Term in Scope for default GET Subscription depth The scope can indicate for the specific subscription what the default length is. The DC decides during scope selection what to include in the offered scopes. Solution: Publish min/max required on resource/Batch/XXXXX APIs

Discussion of responses to requests for large data sets
Given: It's possible for a subscription to have small or enormous at data sets There GB CMD applications on the market that don't require query parameters Query parameters are specified and the Min and Max public support required for our minimum set If you have or don't have query parameters the third party is likely always to ask the first time for everything We agreed in a face-to-face that we were going to support a response of 202 when large off-line data sets are requested In a response asking for everything it should be the discretion of the data custodian to determine what the largest response it's willing to give Some data custodians want to define a fixed maximum size for any request An empty response (feed with no resources) implies no more data Therefore:  Query parameters should remain optional in any given request  Absence of query parameters means “everything” – this means all available data that DC is willing to provide  202 is a valid response for …./Batch/… followed by a notification when data is ready  The DC decides how much a maximum data response to an API request will be  A TP that receives less than anticipated can ask for older data.  If he gets back an empty feed, he has it all. Note: that if there is a gap in the data and he asks for the gap, he may get empty feed but there may be more data behind it.

CIM Tariff Model Charges associated with time threshholds
Charges associated with value threshholds

Additional Information for UsageSummary.CostAdditionalDetail
Add an enumeration tag to lineitem to indicate what kind of charge it is itemKind Tax TOU Demand ThirdParty energy provider fee ThirdParty energy provider usage

Solutions to Add Customer Account Numbers
 Make non-obfuscatedId Add link Extend each Class with IdentifiedObject.name  Add Atom Extension

Account/Agreement Topology

Separation of PII containing Resource RetailCustomer from Subscription*
PII Containing information Subscription Anononymous EUI RetailCustomer CustomerAccount UsagePoint Customer Agreement Normal ESPI Resources ServiceLocation PostionPoint Authorization Key New Resource Existing Resource Non-Resource Class ServiceSupplier EndDeviceAsset PricingStructure *This data structure is to be developed on an aggressive schedule based on HelpDesk issue #83 and PAP10 NAESB Std REQ.18. No single API request can retrieve both PII and Anonymous data

Model UsagePoints of RetailCustomer Location of premise Account ID
Sub Account (SA) ID—Service Agreement / Account is name depending on utility Customer name, nickname (or short name) Address and info SDG&E provides only address and UPID correspondence csv and UsagePoint ID (Customer Obfuscated Key) MeterID ServicePointId Pnode LoadAggregationPoint, SubloadAggregationPoint Climate zone Account open date Account close date SA Open and Close date MDM Agent Id (who does meter read) ServiceSupplierId EnergyServiceProviderId (may be same as service supplier) Demand Response Provider May need list of Ids for service providers rather than explicit?? (0..* relationship{role, href}) Related assets ???? For example pool pump and pool pump participation in a program. Related programs ????

RetailCustomer  API  Authorization FB
GET .../resource/Batch/RetailCustomer/{id} GET .../resource/RetailCustomer/{id} … GET .../resource/RetailCustomer/{id}/CustomerAccount/{id}/CustomerAgreement/{id} GET .../resource/CustomerAgreement/{id} GET .../resource/Batch/BulkRetailCustomerInfo/{id}  Authorization Scope string addition? X RCInfo=AC where – A=Address included , C=AccountInfo included X RCBulkId=123 for access to account info in bulk  Access tokens to access? Individual with access_token, bulk with client_access_token Thoughts:  Simpler to use the one authorization and the one bulkID for this data which would be used with …/Bulk/{bulkId} and with …/BulkRetailCustomer/{bulkId} X Desire to select which APIs query parameters are valid for – but, currently we only test for the specific query paramters needed for IntervalBlock date ranges. Other parameters and which resources they apply to are optional.  Leave generic query parameters as is for all resources but no requirements to support any specific set by resource. FB X Has RetailCustomer – Just one FB_4X with RCInfo X Has Additional Detail indicated by content of RCInfo  Alternative – just like EUI data have separate function blocks for groupings of data (along resource lines) and they are part of scope=FB_xxxxxxxxxx Need to work out FBs that make sense for RetailCustomer  Document as a separate document to maintain isolation of the PII and related discussions (CustomerResourceModelHelpdesk83.docx)  customerResourceUri needed in authorization and Authorization xml structure

Will build deck with new content over time.
Older or other slides Will build deck with new content over time.

Mega Third Party Host Third Party for smaller third parties
Small solar companies that don’t want to implement ESPI technical requirements Have simple web site Want customer data Why does small third party interface to mega third party have to be standardized? Have consulting company they are hosting GB on behalf of Retail Customer authorizes little third party and mega third party to access the data How does mega third party track the authorization which occurs from the little third party Wants ability to tag a OAuth sequence to associate with the little third party – perhaps a state parameter???

Issues What if one customer authorizes for two different provider using mega-third party PG&E only permits one authorization for actual customer/third party pair. Same customer goes to Solar1 and Solar2 who are using the services of MegaTP How can DC know one authorization from the next  Consensus: let this be private matter between MegaThirdParty and customer. No additional protocol required. What if wordpress directs to DC and not TP?

GBCMD Test Harness Using Stunnel Proxy to isolate https from http on test harness Three message types: 1) DataCustodian to Mock Server https  http Use stunnel server config (tpserver.conf) 2) SOAPUI to DataCustodian using groovy script and httpbuilder http https Use stunnel client config (tpclient.conf) – host must be what is in ApplicationInformation remapped to port 8080. 3) SOAPUI to DataCustodian via Selenium https web browser integration Use Selenium browser with what is in ApplicationInformation bypassing stunnel for these messages

 Certified Link Added to feed (or if only entry, added to entry)
<link rel="related" href=" Added to feed (or if only entry, added to entry) Assigned by GBA at test request submission Until certified, may return “in progress” or some useful status Optional request of return type for GET (returned by GBA site): GET GET GET Header parameter Accept: application/json Return (XML Version) – exact form tbd.

Chunking – When the DataCustodian needs to provide data in “chunks”
Have huge data set that DC wants to provide in “chunks” over HTTPS Use common URI – Subscription or Bulk / id Chunked by index and date? Use ESPI query parameters (FB_37) to distinguish chunks <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <BatchList xmlns=" xmlns:xsi= xsi:schemaLocation=" espiDerived.xsd"> <resources>../espi/1_1/resource/Batch/Bulk/1?start-index=1&max-results=1000&published-max= T04:00:00Z &published-min= T04:00:00Z</resources> <resources>../espi/1_1/resource/Batch/Bulk/1?start-index=1&max-results=1000&published-max= T04:00:00Z  &published-min= T04:00:00Z</resources> </BatchList>

Deferred Response when DC does not have data ready
TP DC Request: HTTP GET Content-type: application/xml HTTP returns 202 Request: HTTP POST Content-type: application/xml Response: Request: HTTP GET Content-type: application/xml HTTP returns 200 and Data ThirdParty makes asynchronous request DataCustodian does not have the data ready – returns HTTP 202 Some time later (when ready no guarantees or time limit) DataCustodian sends Notification with original URL in BatchList DataCustodian provides the result

Green Button Data File Summary
Can there be a “digest” of what is in a Green Button data set (i.e. feed) so that the whole data set returned by a GET or DMD can be judged for content without reviewing the contents Different Usage Points in file may have different contents Content may be dependent on when data is retrieved Simple xpath statements can be used to understand the contents Unsuitable data is likely to be asked for once not repeatedly Consensus: Not needed

New XML Schema Tags certificationNumber contentHash
Provides information about the certificate issued to the creator of the file contentHash Provides a checksum value of the files contents the recipient of the file may use to confirm the file has not been tampered with and all elements of the file were received Response to OpenADE Help Desk item 86 Consider RFC 4287 Atom Syndication Format section 5.1 which describes Digital Signatures for Atom:

Certification Structure
link type=“text/html” href=“ />

Possible Options GET PGE – scopes=1_4_5,1_4_10,1_4_5_10

Variable return types Query Parameter: Accept Header Parameter:
GET Accept Header Parameter: Accept: Application/XML Atom link types <link type=“XML” href=“

Certificate Solutions
Create new required resource for GB *** Create a required feed related link Look at other atom feed attributes to implement

[FB_14] OAD011 [NEG] Malformed Refresh Token Request
Verify Data Custodian rejects a malformed Refresh Token Access Token Request Refresh_token field-value pair that was issued to another Third Party The current CMD test harness can only simulate a single Third Party application and thus is not able to present a refresh_token request using another Third Party’s assigned refresh_token Two application information structures would need to be registered at the Data Custodian under test to be able to support this requirement Refresh_token field-value pair has expired A short lived refresh_token would need to be available to perform this test requiring the Data Custodian under test to be able to modify the refresh_token expiration period The authorization server’s token expiration test should not be based on the type of token issued, therefore the existing test in OAD016 [NEG] Invalid Access Token Request (Access Token contained in the Authorization Header has expired) makes this test redundant

Cell Phone API Model How to do authorization for cell phone APP
Still need to involve App developer (DC may not accept request from any app) API FBs Customer and his app authentication Get an access token Differs in certificate management and security Security Privacy Retail Customer vs Subscription

One Data Custodians Potential Design Dimensions for UsageSummary
Nettable: total cost = sum of nettable components NEM: Net Metering Implementation Perspective to Billing data Meter Relationships (Additive-Conjunctive, Subtractive) Special Bill Items NEM Statement Shadow Bill Info Level Pay Plan customers Rates (bill periods: pricing changes, seasons) NEM: Nettable UDC Commodity Taxes (DWR, City and State) Discounts Care FERA Employee discounts Non-nettable Demands Minimum charge Customer charge Event days GHG Non-NEM customers: T&D Employee discounts.

Topics Multiple ReadingTypes in file not referenced by contents
 Proposal – permit (right now excluded) Definition of Net metering FB_07 vs. FW/REV metering FB_08

FB_03 espiderived.xsd grant_types for ApplicationInformation
thirdPartyUserPortalScreen vs. client_uri Appears to duplicate same function client_uri is optional by dynamic registration OAuth protocol Solution Make client_uri and thirdPartyUserPortalScreen optional in schema Authorization.authorizedPeriod and publishedPeriod should be optional since not needed in authorizations for client admin and registration Make both fields optional in the schema Ensure they are present for access_token based authorizations If present validate authorizedPeriod and publishedPeriod are valid date format If either authorizedPeriod or publishedPeriod is present, both are required Allow duration to be present with “0” values implying non-expiring authorizations grant_types for ApplicationInformation Should it be set of grant_types that DC supports? Spring requires separate client_id for client_credentials flow Solution: Nothing needs to change

FB_03 grant_types test assertion in FND002 re: redirect_uri
Solution: Remove the test from FND002 and OADxxx response_types should be “code” Add test to validate content of response_types is “code” Lifetime of client_access_token If shortlived, you need to do client_credentials each day to get a new one This forces you to use the “secret” often which is a greater risk than client access token What does this do the lifetime of the “Authorization”

CMD T&C

Any needed adjustments to testees code
T&C Plan Now (10/14/2014) Tests defined Test implemented Any needed adjustments to testees code February Event 12/23

GreenButton Connect My Data Conformance Testing Requirements Review
For Review FB_03 Core GB CMD FB_39 PUSH model-REST Notifications/bulk transfer FB_34 SFTP for bulk FB_35 REST for Bulk FB_13 Security FB_14 Authorization and Authentication Not yet ready for review FB_19 Partial data update FB_40 Offline RetailCustomer authorization FB_37 Query parameters

CMD Test Development Plan
Phase I - 11/17/ /21/2014 Ron/Don Complete Spreadsheet with Test Requirements and Test Steps. In parallel John/Marty get scheduled with consenting Data Custodians for an initial test – GET ServiceStatus which requires a target URL and a client_access_token for a preconfigured test Third Party. Phase II - 11/19/ /26/2014 OpenADE/OpenESPI Participants review test requirements and procedures and report by exception Don/Ron are building tests Phase III – 12/1/ /31/2014 John/Marty are running tests with consenting Data Custodians

Set UUT Into Test Harness
Harness acts as a TP Need test third party account At least three Test Accounts Two authorized for this third party One known and authorized for any other third party Create / Exchange ApplicationInformation for Test TP Create / Exchange TP client_access_token TP registration_access_token Two Subscription access_token (may included OAuth authorization process) Third subscription access_token (not owned by TP and used in negative tests)

Data Custodian Test Capabilities
Any given data custodian might fall into three possible capability categories: The DC has the ability to clear created authorizations The DC has multiple accounts to authorize so that when a new authorization is needed it can be created The DC has to accept that one test failure may preclude going on to perform other tests

Issues How to expire an access token so it can be tested along with refresh_token  Testee can manually or otherwise “expire” an access token Removal of client_credential flow testing until dynamic registration  Support the API Don’t support in minimum required How the transition from “scope selection” which is not OAuth, to the OAuth sequence which must originate at the Third Party occurs. Need to review Authorization document (needs corrections) and implementers need to check what they are implementing

DataCustodian Registration Values to Communicate with the Certification Test Harness
thirdPartyNotifyUri thirdPartyScopeSelectionScreenURI thirdPartyUserPortalScreenURI client_name Certification Test Harness client_uri

GBCMD Testing and Certification Status
Test Project and Harness Need to add target UUT configuration and refactor tests FB_3 Core Green Button Connect My Data Status: Tests almost complete FB_13 Security and Privacy Status: Initial set of test complete; need to adjust to test harness and needs some small enhancements FB_14 Authorization and Authentication Status: Repertoire of test cases initially identified by Don Coffin and they need to be reviewed and implemented … implementation begun FB_19 Partial Update Data Status: not started FB_37 Query Parameters FB_39 PUSH Model Status: substantially complete FB_34 Bulk SFTP Status: substantially complete (not on github) FB_35 Bulk REST

Authorization Resource
Currently, client_access token can retrieve the collection of authorizations for the specific third party. A concern was raised that theft of that one token would provide access to all tokens (in the Authorization resource) a serious vulnerability. Proposed solutions: Keep API and schema constant but require the omission of access_token and refresh_token tags. Make access to Authorization only based on the contained access_token. That is, the client_access_token can only retrieve the corresponding Authorization resource; registration_access_token can only retrieve the corresponding Authorization resource; the individual access_tokens can only retrieve the corresponding Authorization resource. Consensus solution:  Remove access tokens from the schema.

Access Tokens Reference: ACUDR access_token client_access_token upload_access_token (used only in FB 45) datacustodian_access_token (used only in FB_33) registration_access_token refresh_token ?

CMD Test Development Plan References
All the test development is being done on the project, and, The test requirements and test procedures maintained in the spreadsheet at You can enter issues for discussion on either project as you see appropriate. For Test Code Issues: For Test Requirements Issues:

Retail Customer

Object Identification
Objects are instances of classes Objects need to be identified uniquely because Data in a repository needs to be identified as to where it came from Updates to data (for example from raw to validated) need to identify that it’s the same data that has been updated Devices from which data originates often needs to be associated with the data Devices need to be labeled multiple ways for various purposes – e.g. in a building topology (2nd floor floodlight), in an electrical hierarchy (branch 2 load 3)

IEC IdentifiedObject Master resource identifier issued by a model authority. The mRID is globally unique within an exchange context. Global uniqeness is easily achived by using a UUID for the mRID. It is strongly recommended to do this. A simple string to identify the object. The Name class provides the means to define any number of human readable names for an object. The name can be further attributed by a NameType and a NameTypeAuthority.

IdentifiedObject mRID – usually a UUID that represents the object instance name – simple string to identify the object Name – a class that allows additional names to be used for the same object in different hierarchies. different naming authorities may have the right to name devices for their own purposes it is important to identify the naming authority and naming convention (type) These must also be properties of the object to which they represent since it is the same unique object

ESPI Mapping of IdentifiedObject to Atom
ESPI endpoints expose resources as described by Atom, IETF RFC 4287. Representations are identified as media type “application/atom+xml” ESPI namespace and types (“ are used for objects in <content> element espi:mRID is implemented by atom:id UUIDs are used, as specified in IETF RFC 4122 espi:description is implemented by atom:title atom:published and atom:updated are used Associated objects use atom:link (rel=“related”) espi:name is implemented a resource.name

Solutions to Add Customer Account Numbers
 Make non-obfuscatedId Add link Extend each Class with IdentifiedObject.name  Add Atom Extension

Account/Agreement Topology

Separation of PII containing Resource RetailCustomer from Subscription*
PII Containing information Subscription Anononymous EUI RetailCustomer CustomerAccount UsagePoint Customer Agreement Normal ESPI Resources ServiceLocation PostionPoint Authorization Key New Resource Existing Resource Non-Resource Class ServiceSupplier EndDeviceAsset PricingStructure *This data structure is to be developed on an aggressive schedule based on HelpDesk issue #83 and PAP10 NAESB Std REQ.18. No single API request can retrieve both PII and Anonymous data

Model UsagePoints of RetailCustomer Location of premise Account ID
Sub Account (SA) ID—Service Agreement / Account is name depending on utility Customer name, nickname (or short name) Address and info SDG&E provides only address and UPID correspondence csv and UsagePoint ID (Customer Obfuscated Key) MeterID ServicePointId Pnode LoadAggregationPoint, SubloadAggregationPoint Climate zone Account open date Account close date SA Open and Close date MDM Agent Id (who does meter read) ServiceSupplierId EnergyServiceProviderId (may be same as service supplier) Demand Response Provider May need list of Ids for service providers rather than explicit?? (0..* relationship{role, href}) Related assets ???? For example pool pump and pool pump participation in a program. Related programs ????

RetailCustomer API Authorization FB
GET .../resource/Batch/RetailCustomer/{id} GET .../resource/RetailCustomer/{id} … GET .../resource/RetailCustomer/{id}/CustomerAccount/{id}/CustomerAgreement/{id} GET .../resource/CustomerAgreement/{id} GET .../resource/Batch/BulkRetailCustomerInfo/{id} Authorization Scope string addition? RCInfo=AC where – A=Address included , C=AccountInfo included RCBulkId=123 for access to account info in bulk Access tokens to access? Individual with access_token, bulk with client_access_token FB Has RetailCustomer – Just one FB_4X with RCInfo Has Additional Detail indicated by content of RCInfo

February Event – Preliminary Planning
Celebrate: “Birth of the Green Button Ecosystem” Testing and Certification Complete for DMD/CMD UCAIug ITCA fully established Initial Data Custodians successfully certified for DMD and CMD Shower Successful T&C Adopters with Fame and Congratulations Venue and participation TBD in coming weeks

Best Practice Reading Quality Flags
ReadingType.defaultQuality contains the default quality that applies to all corresponding IntervalReading data. IntervalReading.ReadingQuality.quality allows specific Intervals to override the default in ReadingType UsageSummary.qualityOfReading if present overrides default in ReadingType for those IntervalBlocks within the scope of the UsageSummary.billingPeriod If IntervalReading data are modified, DataCustodian should notify of this change so ThirdParty can retrieve the changes. If UsageSummary.qualityOfReading overrides the ReadingType or IntervalReadings, the IntervalReading qualities would change and a subsequent retrieval (not required) of the IntervalBlocks would come with the corresponding quality flag. The qualityOfReading flag for Usage Summary will indicate latest overriding quality of previously provided interval values corresponding to BillingPeriod dates The Default Quality (from ReadingTypeRef) for OverallConsumptionLastPeriod will indicate quality of total billed usage

Requests that are not inside authorization period
Date of request April 5  Consensus: i – agree on 403 ii – agree on 403

FB3 - Core REST Services [R] GET resource/ApplicationInformation/{ApplicationInformationID} [POS] Accept of valid request [NEG] Reject by invalid ID [NEG] Reject by invalid access-token [POS] Results valid to schema and include required fields for OAuth and TP/DC interaction [C] GET resource/Authorization [C] GET resource/Authorization/{AuthorizationID} [A] GET resource/Batch/Subscription/{SubscriptionID} [C] GET resource/ReadServiceStatus POST: How to test for TP Notification Trigger Uses notification URI from ApplicationInformation Expected content – at least one URI that can be GET’d?

FB_03 Core GB CMD Covers “core services”, resources and access control
atom:entry, atom:feed GET, PUT, POST, DELETE (negative only) ApplicationInformation Authorization (feed) Authorization (entry) Subscription (entry) only available through batch/subscription ReadServiceStatus (entry) Access token expiration testing? Authorization expiration? Notification move to FB_39?

FB_03 Core GB CMD atom:entry / ApplicationInformation
Using required access token of R(registration_access_token) Verify successful GET and response contents (which subset of app info is required in the response?) If it is required by OAuth2 dynamic registration it must be present Other fields not derived from OAuth2? i.e. ContactInfo used in the case of a failed notification to TP Verify negative response to PUT, POST, DELETE: 403 – forbidden Using other access tokens(A,C) or none Verify negative response to GET, PUT, POST, DELETE: 403 – forbidden No token: 401 – unauthorized

FB_03 Core GB CMD atom:feed / Authorization
Using required access token of C(client_access_token) Verify successful GET and response contents (which subset of Authorization info is required in the response?) Verify negative response to PUT, POST, DELETE: 403 – forbidden Using other access tokens (AR) or none Verify negative response to GET, PUT, POST, DELETE: 403 – forbidden No token: 401 – unauthorized

FB_03 Core GB CMD Authorization(C)- all fields(except error fields), some have of which have req. values Subscriptions(A) - feed with at least 1 UsagePoint ReadServiceStatus(C) – all fields with content of 0/1 Using required access tokens Verify successful GET and response contents Verify negative response to PUT, POST, DELETE TBD?: Using other access tokens or none Verify negative response

FB_39 Push Model – REST notifications
Send Notification to TP pre-test set up – DC needs to know TP stand-in URI (FB_33 could automate this?) DC UT has manual “trigger method” to generate notification ApplicationInformation Authorization Subscription Verify well-formed contents of the Notification Get the data (w/ correct access token) and validate the data [NEG] Test GET out of bounds and deferred response (should be moved to or is already present in other FB tests) Authorization no longer valid (how?) – MOVE to FB_14 Data no longer available (i.e. TP took too long for requesting the data) – SFTP error 2 ref to file that does not exist / REST GET error Issue REST GET with wrong token (what token should the test use?) applies specifically to FB_39 to ensure notification data is secure [NEG] If TP Notify fails, verify by demonstration that failure was detected TP is off-line

FB_34 SFTP for Bulk Prerequisites
Pre configured Authorizations Authorizations need bulk scope Notification of Bulk sent to test harness i.e. sftp://services.greenbuttondata.org/DataCustodian/espi/1_1/resource/Batch/Bulk/{BulkID} Test harness retrieves data via SFTP Validate the data Pass schema Must contain 1 feed w/ 1 or more entry(s) Verify there is a valid authorization for each entry and the scope of each authorization for each entry has BR=BulkId Use for list of authorizations to check against Is URI a pointer to a folder or a pointer to a file? SFTP GETALL – could retrieve a set of files from a folder or SFTP GET – single file

FB_35 REST for Bulk Notification of Bulk
Authorizations must be present Authorizations need bulk scope i.e. sftp://services.greenbuttondata.org/DataCustodian/espi/1_1/resource/Batch/Bulk/{BulkID} Test harness retrieves data via REST GET Validate the data Pass schema 1 feed w/ 1 or more entry(s) Verify there is a valid authorization for each entry and the scope of each authorization for each entry has BR=BulkId Use for list of authorizations to check against

FB 13: Security Testing Cyber Security and Privacy Test Requirements
Based on Authorization.docx section 2.7 From SGIP SGCC Committee review of REQ.21 Reviewed with NIST Cyber Security staff NAESB REQ.21 section Initial set of test requirements on next slide

FB 13: Security Testing Initial Set of Test Requirements
[TR_TC001] Test software shall issue a service request over an SSL session and shall verify that the response HTTP header contains the following fields and information – fields TBD [TR_TC002] Verify that REST request headers include – fields TBD [TR_TC003] Verify that the Data Custodian implements TLS 1.2. [TR_TC004] Verify that when communicating with a Retail Customer the Data Custodian negotiates the highest level of TLS mutually supported. [TR_TC005] Verify that when communicating with a Retail Customer the Data Custodian rejects TLS_RSA_WITH_NULL_SHA cipher suites. [TR_TC006] Verify that when communicating with a Retail Customer at a minimum the Data Custodian accepts the TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA cipher suite. [TR_TC007] Verify that when communicating with a Third Party the Data Custodian negotiates the highest level of TLS mutually supported. [TR_TC008] Verify that the Data Custodian maintains an unexpired unrevoked RSA certificate with a public key length of at least 2048 bits.

[TR_TC009] Test software or manual inspection shall verify that the Data Custodian RSA certificate was issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that has been successfully audited according to the criteria of ETSI or WebTrust. [TR_TC010] Test software or manual inspection shall verify that Tokens and IDs communicated by the Data Custodian are opaque and if based on actual Customer information that they are randomized using a secure method to protect privacy. [TR_TC011] Test software or manual inspection shall verify that Tokens and IDs communicated by the Data Custodian consist of at least 48 bits and can be the random number part of an RFC2422 UUID. [TR_TC012] Manual inspection of supporting documentation shall confirm that the Data Custodian implementation utilizes software libraries which are FIPS level 1 or higher and listed on the CMVP website. [TR_TC013] Verify that the Third Party implements TLS 1.1 or higher. [TR_TC014] Verify that when communicating with a Retail Customer the Third Party negotiates the highest level of TLS mutually supported.

[TR_TC015] Verify that when communicating with a Data Custodian the Third Party negotiates the highest level of TLS mutually supported. [TR_TC016] Verify that the Third Party maintains an unexpired unrevoked RSA certificate with a public key length of at least 2048 bits. [TR_TC017] Test software or manual inspection shall verify that the Third Party RSA certificate was issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that has been successfully audited according to the criteria of ETSI or WebTrust. [TR_TC018] Test software or manual inspection shall verify that Tokens and IDs communicated by the Third Party are opaque and if based on actual Customer information that they are randomized using a secure method to protect privacy. [TR_TC019] Test software or manual inspection shall verify that Tokens and IDs communicated by the Third Party consist of at least 48 bits and can be the random number part of an RFC2422 UUID. [TR_TC020] Manual inspection of supporting documentation shall confirm that the Third Party implementation utilizes software libraries which are FIPS level 1 or higher and listed on the CMVP website.

FB_14: Authorization and Authentication (OAuth) Initial Set of Test Requirements
[TR_OA001] Verify Data Custodian provides an Authorization Endpoint per OAuth 2.0 specification [TR_OA002] Verify Data Custodian provides a Token Endpoint per OAuth 2.0 specification [TR_OA004] Verify Data Custodian provides client with Third Party ID value per OAuth 2.0 specification [TR_OA005] Verify Data Custodian provides client with Third Party Secret value per OAuth 2.0 specification [TR_OA007] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request with NO "Response Code" parameter [TR_OA008] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request with NO "client_id" parameter [TR_OA009] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request with NO "scope" parameter Check on “redirect_uri” parameter Check on “state” parameter [TR_OA010] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request containing multiple "response_type" parameters [TR_OA011] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request containing multiple "client_id" parameters [TR_OA012] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request containing multiple "scope" parameters

[TR_OA013] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request containing multiple "redirect_uri" parameters [TR_OA014] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request containing multiple "state" parameters [TR_OA015] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request containing an INVALID parameter [TR_OA016] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request with an INVALID "Response Code" parameter [TR_OA017] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request with an INVALID "client_id" parameter [TR_OA018] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request with an INVALID "redirect_uri" parameter [TR_OA019] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Authorization Code Request with an INVALID "scope" parameter <Note: May need various forms of Invalid SCOPE Parameter Values ????> [TR_OA020] Verify Data Custodian properly validates Retail Customer while processing a valid Authorization Code Request [TR_OA021] Verify Data Custodian proper handles a Retail Customer who fails to pass authentication testing while processing a valid Authorization Code Request [TR_OA022] Verify Data Custodian properly obtains the Retail Customer's authorization for the Third Party to access their data while processing a valid Authorization Code Request [TR_OA023] Verify Data Custodian properly processes a Retail Customer's denial to allow a Third Party to access their data while processing a valid Authorization Code Request

[TR_OA024] Verify Data Custodian properly processes a Retail Customer's authorization to allow a Third Party to access their data while processing a valid Authorization Code Request [TR_OA027] Verify Data Custodian properly authenticates and accepts an Access Token Request with a valid HTTP BASIC Authorization header [TR_OA028] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with an INVALID HTTP BASIC Authorization header [TR_OA029] Verify Data Custodian properly authenticates the authorization_code contained in the "code=" parameter of an Access Token Request was issued to the "client_id" in the Access Token Request [TR_OA030] Verify Data Custodian accepts an Access Token Request containing an authorization_code ("code=" parameter) issued to the "client_id" in the Access Token Request [TR_OA031] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with NO "grant_type" parameter [TR_OA032] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with NO "code" parameter [TR_OA033] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with NO "redirect_uri" parameter [TR_OA034] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with NO "client_id" parameter

[TR_OA035] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with multiple "grant_type" parameters [TR_OA036] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with multiple "code" parameters [TR_OA037] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with multiple "redirect_uri" parameters [TR_OA038] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with multiple "client_id" parameters [TR_OA039] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with a "client_id" parameter and a HTTP BASIC authorization field [TR_OA040] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request containing an authorization_code ("code=" parameter) NOT issued to the "client_id" in the Access Token Request [TR_OA041] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request containing an INVALID authorization_code ("code=" parameter) [TR_OA042] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request not containing a "redirect_uri" parameter if the original Authorization Request contained a "redirect_uri" parameter [TR_OA043] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request containing a "redirect_uri" parameter if the "redirect_uri" does NOT match the "redirect_uri" parameter contained in the original Authorization Request parameter

[TR_OA044] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request containing a "redirect_uri" parameter if the original Authorization Request did NOT contain a "redirect_uri" parameter [TR_OA045] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request containing a previously used authorization_code [TR_OA046] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request containing an expired authorization_code [TR_OA047] Verify Data Custodian issues a properly formatted Access Token Response (grant_type=authorization_code) [TR_OA050] Verify Data Custodian issues a properly formatted Access Token Response (grant_type=client _credentials) [TR_OA051] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with multiple "grant_type" parameters [TR_OA052] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with multiple "scope" elements [TR_OA053] Verify Data Custodian rejects an Access Token Request with an INVALID "scope" parameter <Note: May need various forms of Invalid SCOPE Parameter Values ????> [TR_OA056] Verify Data Custodian rejects a Refresh Token Request with NO "grant_type" parameter [TR_OA057] Verify Data Custodian rejects a Refresh Token Request with NO "refresh_token" parameter [TR_OA058] Verify Data Custodian rejects a Refresh Token Request with multiple "grant_type" parameters

[TR_OA059] Verify Data Custodian rejects a Refresh Token Request with multiple "refresh_token" parameters [TR_OA060] Verify Data Custodian rejects a Refresh Token Request with multiple "scope" parameters [TR_OA061] Verify Data Custodian properly authenticates and accepts a Refresh Token Request with a valid HTTP BASIC Authorization header [TR_OA062] Verify Data Custodian rejects a Refresh Token Request with a INVALID HTTP BASIC Authorization header [TR_OA063] Verify Data Custodian rejects a Refresh Token Request containing a "refresh_token" element that was NOT issued to the requesting Third Party Application [TR_OA064] Verify Data Custodian rejects a Refresh Token Request containing a "refresh_token" element that is expired [TR_OA065] Verify Data Custodian rejects a Refresh Token Request containing a "scope" element that does NOT match the "scope" element value used to obtain the original Access Token. [TR_OAxxx] Verify Data Custodian handling of expired Access Token and Refresh Token

FB_19: Partial update of data
Is this requirement for upload role and not core data custodian?

[FB_37] Query Parameters
Support published_min, published_max

[FB_40] Offline RetailCustomer Authorization
Manual Creation of ApplicationInformation, Authorization(s)

ReadingType Attributes
PG&E notices that their MDM uses various ReadingType attribute values that are not the same as those in the DMD test suite. Question – should meter data reflect the diversity of the meter system or the meaning of data conveyed to the ThirdParty Folks will look at their data and thinking further.

Interpretation of Quality Flags for UsageSummary, ReadingType, and IntervalReading
ReadingType.defaultQuality contains the default quality that applies to all corresponding IntervalReading data. IntervalReading.ReadingQuality.quality allows specific Intervals to override the default in ReadingType If IntervalReading data or quality tags are modified, DataCustodian should notify of this change so ThirdParty can retrieve the changes. UsageSummary.qualityOfReading if present indicates that those IntervalBlocks within the scope of the UsageSummary.billingPeriod may have changed quality as well. Third Party may want to retrieve data again to see the revisions if any. The DC may indicate to the TP that IntervalBlock data has changed by sending a notification for the IntervalBlocks that changed.

Testing and Certification Issues
Test Third Party role for testing DataCustodian Test accounts (how many ; real-or-not ; how much history?) Test Set up – Application Information How to put DC in reproducible state – reset? Minimum FBs to test – FB_3, 13, 14, 19,37,39 Alternative – Test Environment that is same as the Live environment Same Certs etc… Does it need to be real data?

ElectricPowerUsageSummary
Make general UsageSummary and deprecate ElectricPower one… Let query determine period not current/last How to rename fields to remove current/last ambiguity for past requests Determine what required fields might be and some possible new FB to support ecosystem interoperability Single Demand fields too limiting for modern tariffs.

UsageSummary Recommendataions
Create new UsageSummary (which is NAESB REQ.18 name) Add new tags recommended by PG&E Retain all existing tags and make UsageSummary and ElectricPowerUsageSummary identical – but mark old one deprecated for backwards compatibility – new implementations will have to accept either Resource on input Revise descriptions of existing tags to make clear what goes with billing period etc. Provide documentation on how to interpret query parameters for GET UsageSummary

UsageSummary Use Cases
I ask for summary today (with day later publishing) I ask for 3 months last year (query parameters?) Billing period is non-calendar John: I ask for an arbitrary period “roll-up” of consumption GET UsageSummary min=1/15/2014&max=2/28/2014&rollup=True In PGE concept – you get 2 UsageSummarys – one for billing period January and one for billing period February In John concept – you get 1 UsageSummary with totals for 1/15..2/28

Documentation Issues Do in GreenButtonAuthorization.docx section 2.4
Use Cases for Authorization Termination (revocation) -- DC-oriented control of termination process due regulatory requirements in Ca. Do in section 2.8 Behavior of GET UsageSummary with query parameters

Service Request 83 – including Function Block for optional customer info (service point address, etc.) Requirements UsagePoints of RetailCustomer Location of premise Account ID Sub Account (SA) ID—Service Agreement / Account is name depending on utility Customer name, nickname (or short name) Address and info  from Lynn will provide more information SDG&E provides only address and UPID correspondence csv and UsagePoint ID (Customer Obfuscated Key) Current ESPI resources will never return PII GET Subscription does not contain PII Single Authorization covers entire Subscription and Authorization Scope MeterID ServicePointId Pnode LoadAggregationPoint, SubloadAggregationPoint Climate zone Account open date Account close date SA Open and Close date MDM Agent Id (who does meter read) ServiceSupplierId EnergyServiceProviderId (may be same as service supplier) Demand Response Provider May need list of Ids for service providers rather than explicit?? (0..* relationship{role, href}) Related assets ???? For example pool pump and pool pump participation in a program. Related programs ???? Implementation Resource Definition Probably multiple resources are good idea REST service to exchange resource(s) GET only Function Block(s) Wholesale vs Retail Optionality vs Required Possible Scope spec

For May 20 Topics Use Case for “verified for billing”
Added ServiceStatus – return data Simple status or, outstanding batchlists Consensus: Don’t really need this extension because the DC can determine if it wants to send a notification of what hasn’t been retrieved at its discretion. Revised Authorization document Use Case for Small ThirdParty / Mega ThirdParty … maybe another day in future <xs:enumeration value="19"> <xs:annotation> <xs:appinfo>revenue-quality</xs:appinfo> <xs:documentation>data that is valid for billing purposes</xs:documentation> </xs:annotation> </xs:enumeration>

Service Status Consensus: Don’t really need this extension because the DC can determine if it wants to send a notification of what hasn’t been retrieved at its discretion. As is in standard Enhanced to add current outstanding batchlist <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <ServiceStatus xmlns=" xmlns:xsi="  xsi:schemaLocation=" espiDerived.xsd"> <currentStatus>1</currentStatus> </ServiceStatus> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <ServiceStatus xmlns=" xmlns:xsi="  xsi:schemaLocation=" espiDerived.xsd"> <extension>text</extension> <currentStatus>65535</currentStatus> <batchList> <resources>../espi/1_1/resource/Batch/Bulk/1?start-index=1&max-results=1000&published-max= T04:00:00Z&  published-min= T04:00:00Z</resources> <resources>../espi/1_1/resource/Batch/Bulk/1?start-index=1&max-results=1000&published-max= T04:00:00Z&  published-min= T04:00:00Z</resources> </batchList> </ServiceStatus>

Authorization What happens when authorization changes – UsagePoints or period When Authorization changes, place authorizationUri in notification to ThirdParty which can then re-establish its state

What can you negotiate with Scope?
FBTerms – data content, CMD services ValueTerms – default durations and blocking, history length, subscription frequency (i.e. daily data cycle) ResourceTerms – specific resources available by api, bulkID assignments, bulkaccount Other?

Scope Negotiation Oversimplified sequence diagram of Use Case #2 showing essence of scope negotiation TP RC DC Logon Logon HTTP Redirect with Scope={scope1} {scope2} … Authorization request Scope={scope2} Authorization response Scope={scope2} access-token resourceUri authorizationUri referenceId …

Scope issues Limit Scope to access-token and minimal exchange requirements Add list of UPs in a subsequent GET request Could include UPs, optional location, additional data We would define new resource that has this data Are there options? FB_XX Minimum data – UsagePoint FB_XY Optional data location Should it be a different namespace and XSD? We need to make sure they are mutually exclusive – the usage and the PII containing data Namespace and separate schema minimize the opportunity for comingling of data Single authorization with multiple UPs with different scopes Don suggested that the scope is a union of capabilities. You need to get the data to see details Jerry suggests scope be provided with UP?

CSV from GB Data CSV File that opens in Excel
XSLT Transform GBData.XML GreenButtonDataStyleSheetCSV.xslt CSV File that opens in Excel

Notification TP DC HTTP POST Content-type: application/atom+xml

A Couple of Use Cases Use Case 1: How to do Gas and Electric in one Authorization An Authorization Two UsagePoints One Gas One Electric Different Scope Use Case 2: CISR based Authorization Customer logs in has id for utility website Each login has multiple electricity accounts Each account can be multiple usage points Customer login id becomes obfuscated {referenceId} which can be used in REST Uris of the form: /espi/1_1/resource/RetailCustomer/{referenceId}/** Authorization enables a subcriptionID and authorizationID which is (internally) correlated to the customer and the subselection of usagepoints

Discussion on Authorization Structure
Authorization enables the following URLs: <resourceURI> <authorizationURI> /espi/1_1/resource/RetailCustomer/<referenceID>/UsagePoint/... (SA == UsagePoint, CISR == subscription == authorization) with Access-token GET /espi/1_1/resource/RetailCustomer/<referenceID>/UsagePoint <feed> <entry> <id>urn:uuid:40BE6242-F7E6-4B51-828E-59B5FC0C35F0</id> <link rel="self" href=" <link rel="up" href=" <link rel="related" href=" <link rel="related" href=" <link rel="related" href=" <title>a galaxy far, far away</title> <content> <UsagePoint xmlns=" <ServiceCategory> <kind>0</kind> </ServiceCategory> </UsagePoint> </content> <published> T04:00:00Z</published> <updated> T04:00:00Z</updated> </entry> ... </feed>

Customer Information Resource
Requirements UsagePoints of RetailCustomer Location of premise Account ID Sub Account (SA) ID -- Service Agreement / Account is name depending on utility Customer name SDG&E provides only address and UPID correspondence csv and UsagePoint ID (Customer Obfuscated Key) Current ESPI resources will never return PII GET Subscription does not contain PII Single Authorization covers entire Subscription and Authorization Scope Implementation Resource Definition REST service to exchange resource(s) Function Block Possible Scope spec

NAESB REQ.18 Extended Customer Information
This data is already part of the PAP10 parent model to ESPI – REQ.18 This data is part of CIM and associated with CustomerAgreement ServiceLocation may be equal to ServiceDeliveryPoint which is no longer in CIM

Common Information Model (CIM) Customer Overview IEC 61968 and IEC 61970

UsagePoint (from espiderived.xsd)
Obfuscated tariff ID Obfuscated customerAgmtID

Possible Arrangement of Data “pulling the string”
RetailCustomer UsagePoint ServiceLocation Customer Agreement Normal ESPI Resources EndDeviceAsset ServiceSupplier PostionPoint TariffProfile Key Account Resource Existing Resource ERP Resource Authorization

Possible Arrangement of Data “pulling the string”
RetailCustomer UsagePoint EndDeviceAsset ServiceLocation Customer Agreement Key New Resource Existing Resource Non-resource included PostionPoint Authorization TariffProfile ServiceSupplier

FB3 - Core REST Services [TR_CR003] Verify ReadServiceStatus returns “active” status

FB31 - Core REST Services [TR_CR001] Verify the Authorization can be retrieved using the authorizationUri (from the authorization process in FB-14 or FB-40) [TR_CR002] Verify the Authorization resource does not contain PII by inspection [TR_CR003] Verify ReadServiceStatus returns “active” status [TR_CR004] Verify Batch/Subscription/{subscriptionId} returns a valid Atom feed with all UsagePoints and related data including all interval data [TR_CR005] Verify structured URIs are of the form {DataCustodianResourceEndpoint}[/{keyterm}/{id}]* based on the structure of Green Button APIs [TR_CR006] Verify /RetailCustomer/{retailCustomerID}/UsagePoint Returns list of UsagePoints only under the Authorization [TR_CR007] Verify Batch/RetailCustomer/{RetailCustomerId}/UsagePoint/{UsagePointId} Returns all data under and including a single UsagePoint [TR_CR008] Verify that resources returned by the resourceUri are valid to the schema, proper linking, and verify that the data meets the test requirements based on PICS for content and consistency

FB 13: Security Testing Cyber Security and Privacy Test Requirements
Based on Authorization.docx section 2.7 From SGIP SGCC Committee review of REQ.21 Reviewed with NIST Cyber Security staff NAESB REQ.21 section Initial set of test requirements on next slide

Initial Set of Test Requirements
[TR_TC001] Test software shall issue a service request over an SSL session and shall verify that the response HTTP header contains the following fields and information – fields TBD [TR_TC002] Verify that REST request headers include – fields TBD [TR_TC003] Verify that the Data Custodian implements TLS 1.2. [TR_TC004] Verify that when communicating with a Retail Customer the Data Custodian negotiates the highest level of TLS mutually supported. [TR_TC005] Verify that when communicating with a Retail Customer the Data Custodian rejects TLS_RSA_WITH_NULL_SHA cipher suites. [TR_TC006] Verify that when communicating with a Retail Customer at a minimum the Data Custodian accepts the TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA cipher suite. [TR_TC007] Verify that when communicating with a Third Party the Data Custodian negotiates the highest level of TLS mutually supported. [TR_TC008] Verify that the Data Custodian maintains an unexpired unrevoked RSA certificate with a public key length of at least 2048 bits. [TR_TC009] Test software or manual inspection shall verify that the Data Custodian RSA certificate was issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that has been successfully audited according to the criteria of ETSI or WebTrust. [TR_TC010] Test software or manual inspection shall verify that Tokens and IDs communicated by the Data Custodian are opaque and if based on actual Customer information that they are randomized using a secure method to protect privacy. [TR_TC011] Test software or manual inspection shall verify that Tokens and IDs communicated by the Data Custodian consist of at least 48 bits and can be the random number part of an RFC2422 UUID. [TR_TC012] Manual inspection of supporting documentation shall confirm that the Data Custodian implementation utilizes software libraries which are FIPS level 1 or higher and listed on the CMVP website. [TR_TC013] Verify that the Third Party implements TLS 1.1 or higher. [TR_TC014] Verify that when communicating with a Retail Customer the Third Party negotiates the highest level of TLS mutually supported. [TR_TC015] Verify that when communicating with a Data Custodian the Third Party negotiates the highest level of TLS mutually supported. [TR_TC016] Verify that the Third Party maintains an unexpired unrevoked RSA certificate with a public key length of at least 2048 bits. [TR_TC017] Test software or manual inspection shall verify that the Third Party RSA certificate was issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that has been successfully audited according to the criteria of ETSI or WebTrust. [TR_TC018] Test software or manual inspection shall verify that Tokens and IDs communicated by the Third Party are opaque and if based on actual Customer information that they are randomized using a secure method to protect privacy. [TR_TC019] Test software or manual inspection shall verify that Tokens and IDs communicated by the Third Party consist of at least 48 bits and can be the random number part of an RFC2422 UUID. [TR_TC020] Manual inspection of supporting documentation shall confirm that the Third Party implementation utilizes software libraries which are FIPS level 1 or higher and listed on the CMVP website.

[FB_14] Authorization and Authentication (Oauth 2.0)
Verifying response to invalid authorization request (invalid access-token for resource) Verify rejection of request missing access-token Missing header parameters Invalidation of access-token at end of authorization period

Function Blocks for CMD
FunctionBlocks for Green Button Connect My Data Description [FB_3] Core Green Button Connect My Data Core Services [FB_13] Security and Privacy classes HTTPS support [FB_14] Authorization and Authentication (Oauth 2.0) Oauth [FB_19] Partial update data IntervalBlocks without full data sets – e.g. just entrys containing IntervalBlocks [FB_31] Core Rest Services Third Party Access to Subscription/Authorization [FB_32] Resource Level REST Third Party Access to UsagePoints, MeterReading, … and collections [FB_33] Management REST Interfaces GET PUT POST DELETE individual resources … [FB_34] SFTP for Bulk Optionally support the SFTP delivery of Bulk for Bulk request [FB_35] REST for Bulk Support the REST request for Bulk [FB_36] Third Party (Client) Dynamic Registration Use Case 1 [FB_37] Query Parameters [FB_38] On Demand Requests Without Notification [FB_39] PUSH model Notification followed by GET [FB_40] Offline RetailCustomer Authorization to Complement OAuth This is a out of band authorization process without the automated OAuth protocol exchange but producing the same artifacts. [FB_42] Third Party Core REST Services [FB_43] Third Party Management REST Services [FB_xx] Not a Function Block (Implementation Specific) Implementation Specific RESTful API [FB_44] Security and Privacy for Simple Third Party [FB_45] Security and Privacy for Certificate-based Third Party

Opaque vs Structured URIs
No structure, support Opaque URIs using either HTTPS or FTPS protocols in conjunction with the espiDerived.xsd schema. Make Opaque URIs part of the CORE CMD function block. Optional support Structured URIs using either HTTPS or FTPS protocols: make Opaque URIs part of the CORE CMD function block, and structured URIs an optional Function Block in CMD Testing & Certification in conjunction with the espiDerived.xsd schema Required Structure, make structured URIs a requirement but allow some variability – e.g. User versus RetailCustomer; Thus structured URIs would be part of the CORE CMD function block in CMD Testing & Certification in conjunction with the espiDerived.xsd schema.   Specific Required Structure based on espiDerived.xsd Resource Names as described in two documents: GreenButtonAtomLinks and Authorization document

Changes in espiderived.xsd from espi.xsd
*Enumerations: The largest volume of changes is in the explicit documentation of the many enumerations in the standard. In the standard, only a few examples from the IEC standard were provided in a comment. Values that distinguish measurements of Wh, W, VAr, VA, gas, water, etc… are tested for in DMD if corresponding FBs are indicated. *Errors of data type corrected – value, cost, and currency all had deficient data types that were recognized early on *Representation of conversion factors from UTC to Local Time: LocalTimeParameters resource was added *Missing overallConsumptionLastPeriod was added to make ElectricPowerUsageSummary rational as a record of billing period consumption Support for OAuth 2.0: the second largest volume of changes to the schemas is in support of CMD (no impact to DMD) * Differences tested for in T&C

Test Requirements for CMD Brainstorm
FB31 - Core REST Services Verify the authorization can be retrieved Lack of PII Ditto Batch/Subscription, Batch/RetailCustomer, and UsagePoint Verify that resource returned is valid to schema and links are correct Verify structured URIs Verify all required content is present (based on PICs) Could be FB_14 Verifying response to invalid authorization request (invalid access-token for resource) Verify rejection of request missing access-token Missing header parameters Invalidation of access-token at end of authorization period

For February 25 John Teeter raises issue of path vs opaque URIs for REST services for individual and subscription resources Does the uri give any indication of what will be retrieved or not?

Some URIs Found In GBDMD Files
URI ::= protocol://hostname:port/datacustodian/espi/1_1/resource/  resource endpoint of the server <link rel="self" href="User/9b6c7063/UsagePoint/01"/> <NS:link rel="self" href="/User/9b6c7063/UsagePoint/01"/> <atom:link href="User/9b6c7063/UsagePoint/01" rel="self"/> <link rel="self" href="User/25cd2af5c5f6f693f8f6d /UsagePoint/01" /> <link rel="self" href="RetailCustomer/10/UsagePoint/01"/> <link href="RetailCustomer/ /UsagePoint/0" rel="self"/> <link rel="self" href="RetailCustomer/ /UsagePoint/01" /> <link rel="self" href="/User/9b6c7063/UsagePoint/01"/> <link rel="self" href="/User/9b6c7064/UsagePoint/01"/> <atom:link href="/User/9b6c7063/UsagePoint/01" rel="self"/> <link rel="self" href="/RetailCustomer/1/UsagePoint/J "/> <link href="/v1/User/455/UsagePoint/580" rel="self"></link> <link rel="self" href="User/9e610ca b3d21cad5b2a13d028/UsagePoint/01" /> <link href="/v1/User/ /UsagePoint/ " rel="self"></link> <link href="/User/4685/UsagePoint/67" rel="self"/> <link rel="self" href="User/00e308198d dea12c013f77a/UsagePoint/01" /> <link rel="self" href="/User/ /UsagePoint/0"/>

Opaque URIs Opaque URIs Structured URIs
No need to test structure No need to recognize structure in sw Structured URIs Easier to recognize the links Easier to validate what you are doing by looking at them If I have interval block, I know all the possible URIs for that UsagePoint Possible Outcomes of OpenADE Discussion? No structure, support opaqueness Optional Structure, make structured URIs an optional Function Block Required Structure, make structured URIs a requirement but allow some variability – e.g. User versus RetailCustomer  Single Required Structure – defined structure based roughly on GreenButtonAtomLinks and Authorization documents

SFTP for Bulk Transfer Pertinent to the SFTP discussion are the concepts that each Third Party has a defined relationship with the Data Custodian. For automated exchange of information about his relationship there is a special Authorization obtained in Use Case #1 (see the Authorization.docx -- We anticipate that when the Data Custodian has data available, it sends an asynchronous Notification to the Third Party. This Notification provides URIs of note that it is assumed the Third Party will want to retrieve. For the purposes of Bulk transfer, this URI will be: sftp://hostname:port/DataCustodian/espi/1_1/resource/Batch/Bulk/{bulkId} where {bulkId} is a unique identifier assigned by the Data Custodian and the balance of the URI is presented in the ApplicationInformation resource that both parties share (contains all relevant URIs and data for interchange via OAuth etc…). The Third Party would then retrieve the bulk data by using an SFTP client with that URI. This is a straw man concept for discussion on the call. Its advantage is that it in harmony with overall architecture of the Green Button Connect My Data RESTful architecture and simply adds SFTP as a means of transfer when a large data set is to be returned. Used to Retrieve the data using SFTP protocols How to initiate the SSH connection? What is the role if any of the client_credentials authorization to control access to SFTP enabled resources? Discussion – After authorization of TP, they use Pene test, so what is benefit of access-token? sftp user:pw, user=<tpname>, password=<tp client-credentials access-token> Summary

Function Blocks for CMD
FunctionBlocks for Green Button Connect My Data Description [FB_3] Core Green Button Connect My Data Core Services [FB_13] Security and Privacy classes HTTPS support [FB_14] Authorization and Authentication (OAuth) Oauth [FB_19] Partial update data IntervalBlocks without full data sets (Ups,MR, …) [FB_31] Core Rest Services Third Party Access to Subscription/Authorization [FB_32] Resource Level REST Third Party Access to UsagePoints, MeterReading, … and collections [FB_33] Management REST Interfaces GET PUT POST DELETE individual resources … [FB_34] SFTP for Bulk Optionally support the SFTP delivery of Bulk for Bulk request [FB_35] REST for Bulk Support the REST request for Bulk [FB_36] Third Party (Client) Dynamic Registration Use Case 1 [FB_37] Query Parameters [FB_38] On Demand Requests Without Notification [FB_39] PUSH model Notification followed by GET [FB_40] Offline Authorization to Complement OAuth [FB_42] Third Party Core REST Services [FB_43] Third Party Management REST Services [FB_xx] Not a Function Block (Implementation Specific) Implementation Specific RESTful API

Authorization Sequence
Scope access-token Refresh-token resourceUri (the subscription) authorizationUri expiration of the access-token and refresh-token token-type

Proposed CMD Function Blocks
FunctionBlocks for Green Button Connect My Data Description [FB_3] Core Green Button Connect My Data Core Services [FB_13] Security and Privacy classes HTTPS support [FB_14] Authorization and Authentication (OAuth) Oauth [FB_19] Partial update data IntervalBlocks without full data sets (Ups,MR, …) [FB_31] Core Rest Services Third Party Access to Subscription/Authorization [FB_32] Resource Level REST Third Party Access to UsagePoints, MeterReading, … and collections [FB_33] Management REST Interfaces GET PUT POST DELETE individual resources … [FB_34] SFTP for Bulk Optionally support the SFTP delivery of Bulk for Bulk request [FB_35] REST for Bulk Support the REST request for Bulk [FB_36] Third Party (Client) Dynamic Registration Use Case 1 [FB_37] Query Parameters [FB_38] On Demand Requests Without Notification [FB_39] PUSH model Notification followed by GET [FB_40] Offline Authorization to Complement OAuth NEED to Discuss [FB_42] Third Party Core REST Services [FB_43] Third Party Management REST Services [FB_xx] Not a Function Block (Implementation Specific) Implementation Specific RESTful API

Draft of API Allocations to FBs
Function Blocks CRUD API URL [FB_3] Core Green Button Connect My Data GET resource/ReadServiceStatus [FB_31] Core Rest Services resource/ApplicationInformation/{ApplicationInformationID} PUT DELETE resource/Authorization/{AuthorizationID} resource/Batch/Subscription/{SubscriptionID} resource/Batch/RetailCustomer/{retailCustomerID}/UsagePoint resource/Batch/RetailCustomer/{RetailCustomerId}/UsagePoint/{UsagePointId} resource/RetailCustomer/{RetailCustomerID}/UsagePoint/{UsagePointID}/MeterReading/{MeterReadingID}/IntervalBlock resource/RetailCustomer/{RetailCustomerID}/UsagePoint/{UsagePointID}/MeterReading/{MeterReadingID}/IntervalBlock/{IntervalBlockID} resource/LocalTimeParameter resource/LocalTimeParameter/{LocalTimeParameterID} resource/MeterReading resource/MeterReading/{MeterReadingID} resource/RetailCustomer/{RetailCustomerID}/UsagePoint/{UsagePointID}/MeterReading resource/RetailCustomer/{RetailCustomerID}/UsagePoint/{UsagePointID}/MeterReading/{MeterReadingID} resource/ReadingType resource/ReadingType/{ReadingTypeID} resource/Subscription/{SubscriptionID} resource/RetailCustomer/{RetailCustomerID}/UsagePoint resource/RetailCustomer/{RetailCustomerID}/UsagePoint/{UsagePointID}

Scope Term Expansion Scope
[ FBTerms ], [ ValueTerms ], [ ResourceTerms ]; FBTerms “FB=“, { [FBTerm], ”_”} , FBTerm, ScopeDelimiter ; FBTerm “4” | “5” | “6” | “7” | “8” | “9” | “10” | “11” | “12” | “15” | “16” | “17” | “18” | “19” | “27” | “28” | “29” ValueTerms { ( "IntervalDuration=", nonNegativeNumber | namedFrequency), | ( "BlockDuration=", nonNegativeNumber | namedFrequency), | ( "HistoryLength=", nonNegativeNumber), | ( "SubscriptionFrequency=", nonNegativeNumber | namedFrequency), ScopeDelimiter }; ResourceTerms { (“ApplicationInformation,” | “Authorization,” | “UsagePoint,” | “IntervalBlock,” | “MeterReading,” | “ElectricPowerQualitySummary,” | “ElectricPowerUsageSummary,” | “ReadingType,” | “Subscription,” | “LocalTimeParameters,” | (“BulkAccountCollection=”, nonNegativeNumber) | “BR=”, brID), ScopeDelimiter} ScopeDelimiter “;” namedFrequency “billingPeriod” | “daily” | “monthly” | “seasonal” | “weekly” | nonNegativeNumber digit, { digit }; digit 0 | "1" | "2" | "3" | "4" | "5" | "6" | "7" | "8" | "9" ; Where: The ESPI resource – default is “Subscription”. If a Bulk resource is specified via the “BR” term, the value of the {bulkID} is provided after the equals sign (“=”). There could be one or more terms in this list that express the granularity of notifications about resource changes. The function blocks supported (only data content FBs are listed) These are parameterized terms IntervalDuration This is the minimum default length of an interval in seconds (e.g. 900 for 15 minutes, 3600 for one hour, …) BlockDuration This is the length of a block that contains the intervals (based on enumeration of MacroPeriodKind in ESPI above as namedFrequency) HistoryLength This is the length of history buffer of records in number of Interval Blocks (e.g. 12 for a year if BlockDuration is “monthly”). Note: this is what the DataCustodian offers; however, the buffer may not be full for transitional metering systems; in these cases less data will be returned until the buffer is full. BulkAccountCollection Used where the DC wants to provide for the reporting of multiple UsagePoints in a single Subscription. The number of UsagePoints is represented by the value in the assignment statement – e.g. 4 UsagePoints would be BulkAccountCollection=4.

Green Button Connect My Data Testing and Certification
Complete function block descriptions Current: [FB_3] Green Button Connect My Data [FB_13] Security and Privacy classes [FB_14] Authorization and Authentication (OAuth) [FB_19] Partial update data New?: Core Rest Services GET Batch/Subscription … Resource Level REST GET PUT POST DELETE individual resources … SFTP for Bulk REST for Bulk Use Case 1: Client Registration Query Parameters On Demand Requests (as opposed to Notification followed by GET) PUSH model Offline Authorization to Complement OAuth – should this be outside the scope of standard and testing or standardized? No standard isolated way to get the token to a third party without OAuth On exceptional basis some customers can’t be required to use a web account Sometime commercial accounts don’t need privacy and want a service provider just to register the data. Could use Notification service to tell TP about new authorizations made by DC. Out of band how RetailCustomer is identified to the TP “transitive” model TP gets bulk data from DC and then becomes DC – can this architecture be of help here? Possible provision by DC of access token for conveyence to thirdparty devoid of customer information. Maybe even encrypted for TP as in software activations: “Please provide this to your TP (the text between the ====) ============================================= ashoiqwherfhdjnvcjq2dhijvkqnvoiikdfv =============================================“

Questions retailCustomerID=authorization=subscription
Corresponds to a single authorization Results in one or more usagePoints being associated with subscription Scope= “FB=4,5,15;IntervalDuration=3600;BlockDuration=monthly;HistoryLength=13;BulkAccountCollection=10” Says that the BulkAccountCollection has 10 usage points Authorization provides two URIs that can be used: resourceUri  GET this to retrieve usage data (all UPs) authorizationUri  GET/PUT details of Authorization Notification is a list of URIs All nested resources under the UPs are accessible under the single authorization

Service Request 83 – including Function Block for optional customer info (service point address, etc.)

Service Request 84 – having scope selection screen on Data Custodian Site vs 3rd Party site

[85] Time of Use tier indicator alignment with SEP 2.0

Here is a list of topics raised by you all that we will touch on
Issues Raised and Implementation Questions How to use BR=bulkID – relates to HD #61 Service Request 83 – including Function Block for optional customer info (service point address, etc.) Service Request 84 – having scope selection screen on Data Custodian Site vs 3rd Party site Tariff Model Resource Green Button Connect My Data Testing and Certification Complete function block descriptions Complete test case requirements

How to use BR=bulkID – relates to HD #61
Application Profiles BulkID was proposed for large sets of authorizations One account level authorization on top of service level accounts – how to do this Degrees of freedom we have now – can we cover Subscription – 1 or more Usage Points Granularity of a customer authorization BulkID “macro” for a large set of existing authorizations Is there another degree needed?

Contributed by Jerry Yip
Clarification/confirmation about ESPI standard: Does ‘shared resource key’ referenced in the NAESB Ratified word doc correspond to Access Token for oAuth? Yes: This is the access token in the new Oauth 2.0 paradigm. Formal Submission of Application Profile for bulk (vs. batch?) use case as part of GB/GBC Conformance Testing Plan Write up coming to test concept of BulkIDs Question: (options to address 1 Acct to many SA issue) - Does UUID correspond to usage point (1-to-1 relationship)? Is there passing of UUIDs (as resource terms in Scope section of GBAuthorization) during authorization sequence? (how would 3rd Party know multiple usage points have been authorized via single oAuth sequence/login?) - Can multiple access tokens be issued (1 token per SA) per oAuth session? An Authorization is one access_token How does Third Party get to know the depth of data (how many Ups) are in the authorization Perhaps an extension of scope string to have numUPs? Request to consider scope selection screens at Data Custodian Portal instead of 3rd party portal (Need customer to select SAs to share – only Data Custodian has that info) – also minimizes number of redirects (?) Customer info as optional functional block (atom feed) for authorization (sharing with 3Ps) John suggests – prep a large multi account data set and test against a reference sw implementation and measure. SFTP and Streaming, compressed and non-compressed method and compare.

Establish Use Case Story for Commercial Accounts
How to use BR=bulkID with application to account and account groupings, as well as, large ThirdParty collections of Authorizations Establish Use Case Story for Commercial Accounts Design Scope String(s) that convey it Repaint the storyboard with appropriate content

Application Profile Per footnote 1, pg 20 of GBAuthorization.doc:
A “Web Customer” may actually manage more than one “Retail Customer” where “Retail Customer” is an actual “Customer Account”. Thus identifying the specific Retail Customer may be part of the scope selection on both sides. The scenarios in this section refer to the “Retail Customer” for simplicity. Suggest: new FB or Application Profile to properly capture this scenario [FB_31] Web Customer Manages Multiple Customer Accounts (OR: 3.9 Application Profile) For GBCMD, this FB/AP contains tests associated with a Web Customer accessing a Data Custodian’s Web Portal to manage multiple customer accounts. Upon log in to the Data Custodian’s Web Portal, the web customer can manage multiple customer accounts, for which each customer account can represent multiple usage points (for electricity and/or gas). This mostly impacts large agricultural and commercial customer accounts for which a single web customer can represent hundreds to thousands of individual usage points – imagine a franchise manager with multiple branch locations across a data custodian’s service territory. In this scenario, the Web Customer should have the ability to authorize, deauthorize and change scope on an individual “usage point” basis and optionally at the larger aggregated web customer or customer account basis. This includes the ability to perform one-time authorization of multiple customer accounts by a single web customer to third party, and any subsequent scope changes (whether on an aggregated or individual basis) – third party acknowledgement/communication of which customer accounts have been authorized, deauthorized or whose scope has changed needs to be determined. Notes: Whether scope selection in this scenario should live on the 3rd party portal vs. the Data Custodian’s portal needs to be determined as well. Collection has one description or multiple? What is the scope string for this use case? Is there a need for a bulkId in this case (maybe not). New Scope Resource Term= “BulkAccountCollection” Scope= “FB=4,5,15;IntervalDuration=3600;BlockDuration=monthly;HistoryLength=13;BulkAccountCollection” 1/14/2014 To allow the TP to know how many Ups are being provided, suggest Add to BulkAccountCollection a number of UsagePoints BulkAccountCollection=nnn

UsagePoint Grouping in Commercial Account Management
BulkId SubscriptionId UsagePointId /web account Via gui Scope= “FB=4,5,15;IntervalDuration=3600;BlockDuration=monthly;HistoryLength=13;BulkAccountCollection”

Weekly OpenADE Meeting Notes

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Weekly OpenADE Meeting Notes"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Weekly OpenADE Meeting Notes

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Weekly OpenADE Meeting Notes"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback