Re: [Cbor] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-cbor-array-tags-06

Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira@intel.com> Thu, 15 August 2019 16:11 UTC

Return-Path: <thiago.macieira@intel.com>
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 B6B491200C5 for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 09:11:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 6mTVlJjTBkBG for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 09:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A6271200B7 for <cbor@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 09:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message)
X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False
Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Aug 2019 09:03:35 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,389,1559545200"; d="scan'208";a="328412956"
Received: from orsmsx101.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.22.225.128]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Aug 2019 09:03:34 -0700
Received: from tjmaciei-mobl1.localnet (10.54.75.28) by ORSMSX101.amr.corp.intel.com (10.22.225.128) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 09:03:34 -0700
From: Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira@intel.com>
To: <cbor@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 09:03:33 -0700
Message-ID: <6103220.oG8Krn4eWb@tjmaciei-mobl1>
Organization: Intel Corporation
In-Reply-To: <3A28AD58-E2CB-46EC-921C-F35A5F0BBF2D@tzi.org>
References: <156587646384.15832.10776769526244223381.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2845175.7IlyYNWCq8@tjmaciei-mobl1> <3A28AD58-E2CB-46EC-921C-F35A5F0BBF2D@tzi.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Originating-IP: [10.54.75.28]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/LxOOkXtPJZYKjiLx9ppvaF0IlRA>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-cbor-array-tags-06
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, 15 Aug 2019 16:11:15 -0000

On Thursday, 15 August 2019 08:25:07 PDT Carsten Bormann wrote:
> I think that writing a brief new document that allocates a tag or two for
> be/le bfloat16 typed arrays would be the obvious next step (and I sure can
> help you with generating that document next month, if you want).  If you
> think this should go into the existing specification instead, making a
> comment to this mailing list is a good first step (which you did); you
> could also make a more formal comment at the IETF last call that is likely
> to be next after AD review.

Can you at least reserve the full 32 tag range that would be allocated if the 
sign bit were used, then? That is, from tags 64 to 95, instead of just 64 to 
87.

Of course, bfloat16 doesn't need to be in that range, but it makes as much 
sense to use it as the little-endian 8-bit trick you used there.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel System Software Products