IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cbor] [COSE] CDDL for COSE + EAT/CWT + SUIT + CoSIWD

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 16 December 2021 15:18 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 432163A083C; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 07:18:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
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 UyqtXoxYIlBE; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 07:18:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 424F43A0836; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 07:18:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26DD938F35; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:23:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 8qxuXSDhDxcB; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:23:00 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84EF338F34; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:23:00 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1639668180; bh=Uq9Am2CGCuW8hSAsJ7aD+dYxBmWQ/dXX/0xUF2p6rUY=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=IaZP0V882HdkdhRWtlcM+LBV+gyyED4or0+ol7jTRVvDiMvGMtEcfO06IffPb8r/t 6N3uHzTHrWhCnTEF4x1CEoghXsWQTdsPBGOheHRAiXG/C5nravzldXOhLYYyzAG6WN wP6NNSsoIx4DYAvmcSq6cqDFXJHK2DXmgCer0olE0HaYyCYOv/Ikj1k3JoofLAxkHt qgQBtbNdXSw5Nx1X8qJcU0NTHTnshmAZdd//Tdo6EpgiP2s+P0VijlKW5MYjdkLFKL YjHqEBJ1xOsPt6JBlWX49Y4yXTbjiJeAGUujtC3RaIciH9lxDVKj8fxjUBebXem/ZK N5rffVX6mkHAA==
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03F241B9; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:18:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "cbor@ietf.org" <cbor@ietf.org>, cose <cose@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <792A0E49-9C4A-4817-BF0A-2B76EBE6EDED@island-resort.com>
References: <85278E84-AD34-4F68-94DC-437BABCCD621@island-resort.com> <DBBPR08MB591541267172A49382892483FA6F9@DBBPR08MB5915.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <75C33F50-0C92-47B9-80DB-050499F51630@tzi.org> <DBBPR08MB5915DCAD539AD2CA4770515BFA6F9@DBBPR08MB5915.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <27539CB9-42E7-4313-8786-58B0A504E7E2@island-resort.com> <9912.1639076050@localhost> <792A0E49-9C4A-4817-BF0A-2B76EBE6EDED@island-resort.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: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:18:45 -0500
Message-ID: <12621.1639667925@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/AMKDyI7eimsOHm6dTDqR613xP0I>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] [COSE] CDDL for COSE + EAT/CWT + SUIT + CoSIWD
X-BeenThere: cbor@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Concise Binary Object Representation \(CBOR\)" <cbor.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cbor>, <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cbor/>
List-Post: <mailto:cbor@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cbor>, <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:18:55 -0000

Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com> wrote:
    > For example, I find what CoSWID does awkward:
    > - Replicating code and definitions generally seems poor practice
    > - It excludes the possibility for encryption
    > - It doesn’t define what EAT needs, a signed or unsigned message that
    > is always a tag, somewhat motivating me to replicate/author CoSWID CDDL
    > in EAT.

I think that this is because we haven't gotten a library/public-include
system for CDDL.  So the urge is to make documents self-contained.

Given the audience for CoSWID is largely outside of the IETF, in a sector of
the industry that is, at present, very immature, I think that CoSWID did the
right thing.

EAT is a bit more inward facing (given TEEP, SUIT, etc. customers), or at
least, the external audience is a lot more mature (TCG, CCC, ...), so perhaps
the outgoing references are really a sign of the direction we should be
going.

As Carsten said, the CBOR WG needs to think about how exactly to use CDDL.


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email