Re: [apps-discuss] Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Wed, 22 May 2013 20:20 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4093C11E80EE for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 May 2013 13:20:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5bI-YoyvwmHq for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 May 2013 13:20:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AFB011E80A2 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 May 2013 13:20:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [165.227.249.247] (sn80.proper.com [75.101.18.80]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4MKKYhE061949 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 22 May 2013 13:20:35 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <CABP7Rbftgm2asyu6LgGHoZVQKy3aCY5vHu6_qHQrXbdd+P65wA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 13:20:34 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E65D84C2-0232-4AE2-AB9C-0F5FBEE459BB@vpnc.org>
References: <61CB1D18-BABC-4C77-93E6-A9E8CDA8326B@vpnc.org> <CABP7RbcUJJoPJYdCOGSoa8fJfqj+R5RttjDtG5zXDirUV9OMQA@mail.gmail.com> <3638B63C-0E75-4E99-BF65-28F83DB856A6@vpnc.org> <CAMm+LwjKzHnOKDp0dmHN1Czes-f7tcJ2U1qz7S_HoSpcfKMyyA@mail.gmail.com> <04905D53-5022-4741-A2B6-9EE4593A4C65@tzi.org> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1305221841270.3056@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <8F16DE1E-3D5F-4C38-937E-14EAF66D3D94@vpnc.org> <519D0893.8010602@bbiw.net> <CB2CE68C-278A-4468-8C05-27622B7FA9A2@tzi.org> <CABP7Rbftgm2asyu6LgGHoZVQKy3aCY5vHu6_qHQrXbdd+P65wA@mail.gmail.com>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503)
Cc: IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 20:20:38 -0000

On May 22, 2013, at 11:43 AM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:

> Best bet: define the syntax, provide a couple of great open source
> implementations, let people know about them.. then time will tell
> whether it'll be worthwhile to standardize.

Fully disagree. As a great recent counter-example, see what is happening in the MessagePack world which is following exactly what you suggest, and there is a lot of bad feelings.

> There shouldn't be any
> rush on getting an RFC done.

There is no rush to get it done, but there is no reason to not publish it once it is stable and has gotten a lot of good input.

--Paul Hoffman