IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Anima] Russ: Re: rfc822Name use in Autonomic Control Plane document

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 01 July 2020 04:02 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 D497E3A0B37 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 21:02:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 nqe_2QlMD8qs for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 21:02:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E02D3A0B33 for <anima@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 21:02:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06D50389BA; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 23:59:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id I9gD6Lnwatis; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 23:59:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 842E9389B4; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 23:59:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE96F1F9; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 00:02:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
cc: Anima WG <anima@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <108b7d1b-26b7-557a-f203-05f596550b13@gmail.com>
References: <FB6127DD-A111-4E40-A095-5E3C03AA6660@vigilsec.com> <9406.1592756905@localhost> <3A92516D-B980-4231-9059-EF7234BA8610@vigilsec.com> <20200627054056.GA35664@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <FF181E1F-2B93-47BB-AB45-7F66D880108B@vigilsec.com> <20200627224640.GA41058@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CABcZeBN_tQgH8ZZmVg82h8-cthm0uQ6b846N71G9NYFSxdUMRQ@mail.gmail.com> <e84cc89e-6503-7cd7-4281-9cf4629a7bb7@gmail.com> <3A5D70B2-B3F9-42A6-9219-F25D657A7A7F@vigilsec.com> <20200628161149.GA16571@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <20200630161004.GA48194@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <69B9B7B6-4B75-4336-9F3F-45CD4FA51291@cisco.com> <23063.1593567251@localhost> <108b7d1b-26b7-557a-f203-05f596550b13@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 00:02:30 -0400
Message-ID: <26713.1593576150@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/7vemnnYznGJP3FA_rqSXrC-NQy8>
Subject: Re: [Anima] Russ: Re: rfc822Name use in Autonomic Control Plane document
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: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 04:02:34 -0000

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
    > I do agree that avoiding ASN.1 is a very desirable goal, for exactly
    > that reason: high probability of human error. So my gut feeling
    > is to go for a URI.

otherName can trivially contain a UTF8 string.
yes, there is an OID that goes in first, but it is already implemented.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email