IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Acme] ACME or EST?

Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> Sat, 29 November 2014 14:50 UTC

Return-Path: <rlb@ipv.sx>
X-Original-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9E131A1A66 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Nov 2014 06:50:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7qmXYAeyX5Gn for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Nov 2014 06:50:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vc0-f176.google.com (mail-vc0-f176.google.com [209.85.220.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED8401A1A46 for <acme@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Nov 2014 06:50:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vc0-f176.google.com with SMTP id hq12so3513806vcb.7 for <acme@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Nov 2014 06:50:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=DNjOk3Gxsx3qTytVhSBlwbOzoLZqLDD5igknMEBMAWI=; b=TjxGrKl8hAlDBwnopxfeGwa76rZqXO26dJisYJ0QhBVUdX4+wkxvTouO5K7Y1AcON+ D9TCmAjBj/BKotI+V+3g57q8tnuOf/oab0dhvMNQy+Frtn1Yd/H4xj5teiCHdvp2lLUt yE7i7E/Kzl6p65f5QWUM3xiTds4hhxJEilxam/cnAw/X1ouF8X13AxRHBTkaRbQRGuJg HGmqivvPQEhdS7/YlPYTCK1LTNY012a9t0PLGoXjnmal7BytfFEEpm8RUw/PfAWIAows F8g8YuubySM3lcIIXPNmxmSSp3Jaxw/Vp1cm932TGKU0syugS8l+Gl8U2BB7jEJXlJ3q 5RsQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnkUWMjtGfkOjO3QCjvCtBR1mypn78CatNAuwe4Y0yPkIEVFPc1Cb8Gcffs+DpPNbJaIrG6
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.221.66.143 with SMTP id xq15mr8141895vcb.35.1417272631958; Sat, 29 Nov 2014 06:50:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.31.149.1 with HTTP; Sat, 29 Nov 2014 06:50:31 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <m261dy14xj.wl%randy@psg.com>
References: <AD5940AA-6F01-4D0E-A4E0-19AEA56BBED3@vpnc.org> <CAL02cgTgpjQffow2XuaNuT7BtqYVttXdVUgyqBFbsAbN4g0VzQ@mail.gmail.com> <DEC7A8A8-563D-41B3-94AC-71DC7219D3F8@cisco.com> <CAHOTMVLJFQsKUVaZueeqx4NRtzM+a4asU14YnQPC+2LHQCtcEQ@mail.gmail.com> <54752FD9.6040708@cs.tcd.ie> <m27fyg4yzg.wl%randy@psg.com> <CAMm+LwjOgYistjb8jo_aw0jJ9+0YpL++Y4yJONj1rCGG0kC94A@mail.gmail.com> <DM2PR0301MB0655D5E0292BAE408C92B3B7A8710@DM2PR0301MB0655.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CAHOTMV+Ch3ViOfQbiwfh=UU96pGONBZiMsaDZUn1x5cHOT=wNw@mail.gmail.com> <m261dy14xj.wl%randy@psg.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 09:50:31 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL02cgRROBnTK1RZtPABu_6xCs9f4U758sC-UJzeQ1J+R0UJDA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113608d2c733b00509007fb2"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/WjPRPMsvU5gKED5RkzY34chOT2U
Cc: Tony Arcieri <bascule@gmail.com>, ACME <acme@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Acme] ACME or EST?
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Automated Certificate Management Environment <acme.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/acme/>
List-Post: <mailto:acme@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 14:50:35 -0000

On Saturday, November 29, 2014, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:

> > Christian Huitema <huitema@microsoft.com <javascript:;>>
> >> I am not sure that the message description language matters very much
> Tony Arcieri <bascule@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> > Here's a paper that argues otherwise:
> > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~sergey/langsec/papers/langsec-tr.pdf
>
> how did you guess what i had in mind :)?  one would hope that we do not
> need to be taught this lesson yet again.  the only answer i have gotten
> is an example parser,
> https://github.com/quartzjer/js0n/blob/master/src/js0n.c which, while an
> fsm, does not unequivocally make the case that the language is lr.


There appears to be a yacc grammar for JSON [1], which implies that it is
at least LALR.  I'm not real current on my language theory, but IIRC, that
implies that it is LR.

[1] https://gist.github.com/justjkk/436828



>
> randy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Acme mailing list
> Acme@ietf.org <javascript:;>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email