Re: [Anima] [Iot-onboarding] RFC 8366: voucher artifact error in example?

Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> Tue, 11 February 2020 15:18 UTC

Return-Path: <0100017034d44195-102b3d22-0c0f-48dd-b9f2-0487e81270f2-000000@amazonses.watsen.net>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB3D212013D; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 07:18:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amazonses.com
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 R4uBNIS2Ah4U; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 07:18:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from a8-88.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a8-88.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.8.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E54612013F; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 07:18:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=6gbrjpgwjskckoa6a5zn6fwqkn67xbtw; d=amazonses.com; t=1581434293; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:Feedback-ID; bh=qVfPbUMAwFr+xJZp0O3Sh/1czj31BQI/h6fu3ST3rjQ=; b=HZ4fi2sxkTRS7bu53LO+8d2t6C7dapO/BqqGuPPVP8DD3kblg8XAWI12b0x495Fg BvEYFCy2l29Okqcprox8LSvchlBxnosXT6MTUaHgbzsmpnLidQUxQxlHMLbb0DgXtdN a6JgHF4t+VPtGHC305SIFNE5G/aThP7q2Svc3wEA=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>
In-Reply-To: <27564.1581420319@dooku>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:18:12 +0000
Cc: iot-onboarding@ietf.org, anima@ietf.org, "M. Ranganathan" <mranga@gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <0100017034d44195-102b3d22-0c0f-48dd-b9f2-0487e81270f2-000000@email.amazonses.com>
References: <CAHiu4JOMfY2oZb1TG5Lbbyb=Wd09+Ju9fOcBU5VcvmvmCQ7_ZQ@mail.gmail.com> <1556.1581357910@dooku> <0100017031a2d6ec-545e8e6a-1259-45da-a7da-1da0a461cce6-000000@email.amazonses.com> <27564.1581420319@dooku>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
X-SES-Outgoing: 2020.02.11-54.240.8.88
Feedback-ID: 1.us-east-1.DKmIRZFhhsBhtmFMNikgwZUWVrODEw9qVcPhqJEI2DA=:AmazonSES
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/7HGdq6Jan4GlgLU8uBTnLtbSy1c>
Subject: Re: [Anima] [Iot-onboarding] RFC 8366: voucher artifact error in example?
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:18:17 -0000


> On Feb 11, 2020, at 6:25 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
> Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net> wrote:
>> The confusion is likely because folks expect that the “yang-data”
>> extension define a node, but it doesn’t.  It acts more like a YANG
>> “grouping” than a YANG “container” in that regard. For instance, give
>> the YANG:
> 
> Okay, so are you saying that it has to be a voucher-artifact, not a voucher,
> and the examples in BRSKI are wrong?
> (That's really annoying)

I’m unsure what you mean by “it” but, again, the examples in RFC 8366 are correct.
Note that “voucher-artifact” does NOT appear in the examples.

AFAICT, the examples in Section 3.3 in keyinfra-35 are also correct.

K.