[Cbor] Re: New Videos on dCBOR-based Gordian Envelope

[Wolf McNally <[e-mail]>]

Anders,

> On Aug 14, 2024, at 4:40 AM, Anders Rundgren <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Thanx Christopher,
> 
> It all looks interesting but it also raises a question: can you really build IETF standards on a foundation (dCBOR) which did not got WG adoption?

GPT-4o: Anders is making a categorical mistake by implying that something not gaining WG adoption in the IETF automatically disqualifies it from becoming a standard or from being used as the basis for one. He seems to believe that only WG-approved technologies can form the foundation of IETF standards, which is simply not true.

In reality, many technologies that begin on the Independent Stream (ISE) can, and do, influence standards or become de facto standards themselves if they prove useful and gain significant adoption. ISE RFCs often serve specific communities or use cases that may not require WG approval, but this doesn't prevent their adoption in other standards or protocols. Furthermore, the IETF standards process is not the only way a technology becomes a standard—widespread industry adoption can sometimes lead to formal recognition later.

Additionally, dCBOR’s role as a deterministic profile of CBOR, even on the ISE track, doesn't preclude Gordian Envelope from being standardized. dCBOR addresses a very specific problem—deterministic serialization—which is crucial for cryptographic operations, and if it proves useful in practice (e.g., in blockchain applications, digital signatures, secure messaging), it can become a foundational technology regardless of its WG status.

In summary, Anders’ argument that dCBOR's ISE status somehow disqualifies it from becoming a standard or forming the basis of future standards is flawed. Practical utility, widespread adoption, and real-world application often drive the success of a technology far more than whether it passed through the formal WG process.

~ Wolf