IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cbor] GRASP packet header extensions (CBOR question)

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Fri, 19 August 2022 21:16 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 08443C1522A3; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 14:16:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.609
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.609 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AmELN_PNm4wl; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 14:15:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:32::15]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC0E5C1522A7; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 14:15:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.149] (p5089abf5.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.171.245]) (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 4M8ZKz10T5zDCbN; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 23:15:51 +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: <5fa4a9c7-bc0a-cba0-04fb-4cf5e7777c9e@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 23:15:50 +0200
Cc: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>, anima@ietf.org, cbor@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 682636550.731002-9c4bf6b81eb635cfff5b8d5d3ed3747f
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4E167B3F-9C68-4333-BB76-36119B8F39DF@tzi.org>
References: <Yv+miC76QMc887cJ@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <A303E7B3-A83F-4B04-9C6F-5143E4A0B54D@tzi.org> <5fa4a9c7-bc0a-cba0-04fb-4cf5e7777c9e@gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/JwbPrmiId35-cpi2ljJVN7SXpvQ>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] GRASP packet header extensions (CBOR question)
X-BeenThere: cbor@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 21:16:02 -0000

On 2022-08-19, at 23:05, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>> EXTENSION_TYPE = 0..255
>> There is no reason to limit this to 255.
>> ➔ EXTENSION_TYPE = uint
>> (Do you plan to creat a registry for these?
> 
> The 'extension_type' terminology is confusing, because these would
> be new GRASP options, and they already have a registry.
> 
>>> grasp-extension = [ EXTENSION_TYPE, *any ]

Ah, OK, Section 2.9.1 of RFC 8990 (why didn’t we provide CDDL for the general concept of a GRASP option?).
So this really should have been called grasp-option, and the grasp-option in message-structure should have been called something else?  (It seems to include both 2.9.1 grasp options and 2.10.1 objective options, as well as ttl and waiting-time in the message types defined in RFC 8990).

Apologies for taking a while to swap in the GRASP details again...

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email