A Dog’s Tale on RFID Standards

By definition, “standards” is “fulfilling specific requirements as established by an authority, law, rule, custom, etc.; a guiding principle.” However, I can state without equivocation that sometimes the pursuit of standards can literally go to the dogs. When discussing this matter with TAGSYS’ Chief Technology Officer, Alastair McArthur, he instantly recalled his experience with his children’s pet bulldog, Oscar. It seems Oscar has had an encounter of the closest kind with RFID.

As an unsuspecting pup, the French bulldog was injected with an RFID tag. The use of RFID for the identification of companion animals, referred to as micro-chipping, is a very mature application whereby small glass encapsulated tags are implanted as sub-dermal tracking/identification devices containing preprogrammed memory encoding. This technique offers a means for enabling accurate identification of the animal.

The saga of Oscar’s RFID tag, which later included four RFID tags, actually began in Australia where he was whelped. When the the first tag was inserted, all assurances were given that it was compliant to Australian standards. Later, when McArthtur and his family (including Oscar) relocated to Europe with his RFID Company, TAGSYS, he was informed that a second transponder was required in order to be compliant with the European Union “Pet Passport Program” mandate. The saga continued when the local French vet was unable to read either of these tags and a third tag, governed by the French standard, was implanted.

Clearly, standards are more complex than their name suggests. Just because something is referred to as a “standard” doesn’t necessarily confer interoperability. Often manufacturers design their own proprietary functions into what will be sold as a standard-compliant product and, as a consequence, compatibility with other manufacturers’ products is not guaranteed. In Oscar’s case, while the tags were all different, they did have one thing in common: They were all indeed “standard” tags. But, standard where? And by which set of standards?

Alphabet soup

The micro-chipping of pets and other companion animals is an example of one RFID application which is struggling to implement a globally recognized standard. With the emerging international opportunity of applying RFID to the tracking and tracing of cases and pallets (Logistic Supply Chain applications), and even more critically, tracking products at item level where billions of tags will eventually be deployed, it is clear that standards do require careful scrutiny and meticulous attention.

Standardization is a complex subject. There are a myriad of standards groups (international, national, and industrial), generally denoted by acronyms such as IATA, CEN, ETSI, ANSI, AIAG, ISO, and the list goes on. This alphabet soup is further complicated by an apparently random numbering of standards. To understand the RFID standardization environment some measure of structure and simplification is required. Among the numerous standards groups are two key bodies driving the RFID standardization process: EPCglobal and ISO (International Standards Organization).

EPCglobal Inc. is an industry standards group comprising end-user companies and technology suppliers. As a joint venture between GS1and the Uniform Code Council® (UCC®), EPCglobal Inc.’s objective is to drive the global adoption and implementation of the Electronic Product Code (EPC) network across industry sectors. The EPC network will enable total asset visibility within industry and retail logistics supply chains. RFID is seen as a key facilitating technology for the EPC network and is one focus of the standardization activities of the organization.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is, as its name suggests, an international standards body. It is the world’s largest developer of standards; a non-governmental organization that works with representatives from 147 countries to define standards for technology. For over eight years, ISO has been developing standards for RFID.

In the past these two organizations have operated quite independently on standards development, often with divergent approaches. Encouragingly, in the last 12-months there has been growing collaboration between these organizations. This is evidenced by the fact that the Generation 2 Electronic Product Code (EPC) tag/reader specification, ratified by EPCglobal on December 2004, is expected to be approved by ISO and included as an amendment of the ISO18000 series by the end of 2005.

A breakdown of standards

Beyond standards organizations, there are four main types or standard categories relevant to RFID:

• Technology Standards: ISO18000, EPC Class 1, Generation 2 - Addressing the technological features such as the air interface communications format and data exchange protocols, which must be in agreement in order to assure compatibility or interoperability in systems produced by different manufacturers or systems providers.

• Application Standards: ISO10374.2, ISO17365, ISO17364 - Deals with agreements on the way or ways in which technology or systems are to be used (in particular, applications to ensure consistent usage in a specified manner). Many devices only require technology standards. However, open systems application standards using data carriers must ensure that data created at a source should be perfectly understandable by any recipients. Application standards often set parameters and associated values, which constrain the associated technology standard in terms of performance or other features. The application standard may incorporate the data standard or refer to an external data standard.

• Data Standards: ISO15963, ISO15961, ISO15962, EPC Tag Data Specification Version 1.1 - Dealing with the agreements on the way data content on RFID tags is structured for compatibility and interoperability requirements.

• Conformance Standards: ISO18046, ISO18047 - Addresses agreements that specify the manner in which systems are to perform in order to be acceptable relative to particular performance or operational criteria.

Of these categories, the ones most relevant to the selection of RFID readers and tags are the technology and compliance standards. The technology standards strive for compatibility and interoperability, and the conformance standards specify those tests that may be conducted to ensure that manufacturers are applying the technology standards.

Much media coverage has been centered on the EPC technology standards; initially, EPC class 0 and EPC class 1 generation 1 specifications—neither suitable for global implementation—and more recently, EPC Generation 2, which has been designed for international use. Over time, however, it is likely that there will be increasing visibility of the ISO18000 standard, which was published well before the EPC Gen 2 specification and is the most comprehensive RFID technology standard available.

Even within ISO18000 there are choices to be made. The standard specifies RFID reader and tag communication protocols for five different RFID operating frequencies: 135 KHz, 13.56 MHz (HF - high frequency), 2.45 GHz, 860-960 MHz (UHF - ultra high frequency) and 433 MHz. Each frequency offers different characteristics and benefits based on the laws of physics governing the frequency bands. The frequencies offer differing read ranges, size of tags, robustness against environmental interference, and reliability of operation in close proximity to other tags or in random tag orientations. Two RFID frequencies are emerging as the dominant players: HF and UHF—HF for item-level tagging and UHF for case and pallet tagging. HF is covered by ISO18000, Part 3 and UHF is covered by ISO18000, Part 6.

Developing standards

Today, EPCglobal is continuing to drive the standards process by announcing the formation of two new standards development working groups; one focused on creating an EPCglobal Generation 2 standard for HF brands for addressing the needs of healthcare sector applications. The two specific groups being formed are the HF Air Interface Working Group and the UHF Air Interface Working Group. The HF Working Group will focus on extending the logic and technology into HF that is today part and parcel of the existing UHF Gen2 standard.

The UHF Working Group will be examining the potential for extensions to the current Gen2 UHF protocol for adding security features that are needed for item-level tagging. The item-level joint requirement group’s already-established scenarios and requirements will provide the basis by which both groups will be operating. As a neutral organization founded on a frequency-agnostic vision, EPCglobal’s aim is to create an environment that ensures common data structures and command sets that enable ease and simplification of implementation.

A final word

In the final analysis, when viewing standards we gain a healthy respect for the tireless efforts required to keep pace with the ebb and flow of technology. We also come to understand that it’s a continual work-in-progress that is never in an inert state. Standards evolve as technology evolves and improves. Quoting from an article by IDtechEx, “[EPC] Gen 2 is, however, a bloated design compared to the concept of a simple read-only tag. However, it is a necessary one to bridge regional differences and provide a robust solution for the limited RFID infrastructure in place today. RFID is an evolving technology and no doubt at some point generation 3 will become the focus.”

It is already envisaged that a generation 3 standard will arrive. Standards evolution is not restricted to RFID. It is inherent to the very nature of technology where innovation leads to better ways of doing things. Adopting a “wait and see” approach for final global standardization in any technology sector will mean that you will be watching your competitors pass you by while you are still sitting on the fence, awaiting the elusive final global standard. The best and logical strategy is to recognize that RFID standards will continue to evolve, and to therefore adopt RFID infrastructure solutions which are flexible and adaptable to air-interface communication protocol changes. There are encouraging signs of convergence to truly global RFID standards and global regulatory harmonization. Deployments of RFID products and solutions are increasingly based on ISO standards rather than proprietary offers, cementing the broad adoption of RFID technology around the world.

One final note: The hero of our saga, Oscar the French bulldog, is now relocating to the United States and will be dutifully tagged with yet a fourth RFID tag, complying with U.S. standards. Our well-traveled canine is keeping a stiff upper lip. n