IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cbor] Iotdir early review of draft-ietf-cbor-network-addresses-05

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Mon, 26 July 2021 14:19 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 C14483A1592; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 07:19:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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 Px-7Zloan_fs; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 07:19:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48E473A1591; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 07:19:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc89.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4GYMW96FjLz2xMW; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 16:19:33 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJ+Xf0B2EUFJJ3h19BMKZBcTQaiR4uk+LdoaM5MG_+R1-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2021 16:19:33 +0200
Cc: draft-ietf-cbor-network-addresses.all@ietf.org, IETF IoT Directorate <iot-directorate@ietf.org>, Mohit Sethi <mohit.m.sethi@ericsson.com>, cbor@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 649001972.976229-ac71f36a697214948f8f4a4893f8a4a7
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0F643A58-126F-4DAA-B5CF-485C092369F5@tzi.org>
References: <162729343263.13734.5774247416866337222@ietfa.amsl.com> <ECE0152F-121F-4EC4-94C3-EC7DB4A115D0@tzi.org> <CALaySJ+Xf0B2EUFJJ3h19BMKZBcTQaiR4uk+LdoaM5MG_+R1-Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/Bry2BdTKNHhr1JW-xLwVLlj9u_M>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] Iotdir early review of draft-ietf-cbor-network-addresses-05
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: Mon, 26 Jul 2021 14:19:41 -0000

On 2021-07-26, at 15:42, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
> 
> But if the working
> group would rather see such new implementors use 52/54, it would be
> useful to have a few words about that in this document, however brief
> and however non-normative.

Right.  The intro says about our motivation:

   [RFC8949] defines a number of CBOR Tags for common items.  Tags 260
   and 261 were later defined through IANA.  These tags cover addresses
   (260), and prefixes (261).  Tag 260 distinguishes between IPv4, IPv6
   and Ethernet through the length of the byte string only.  Tag 261 was
   not documented well enough to be used.

   This specification provides a format for IPv6 and IPv4 addresses,
   prefixes, and addresses with prefixes, achieving an explicit
   indication of IPv4 or IPv6.  Prefixes omit trailing zeroes in the
   address.  […]

We could expand that a bit more.

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email