IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cbor] Tagging requirement

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 18 August 2020 19:04 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 4918F3A0A34 for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 12:04:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 8i0UE1ka7bxF for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 12:04:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B63333A0917 for <cbor@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 12:04:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C23A389BE for <cbor@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 14:43:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id oTG_6u5z_45S for <cbor@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 14:43:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5161A389B7 for <cbor@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 14:43:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C2447B for <cbor@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 15:03:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: cbor@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <1FC978C4-5EB5-42D9-B522-28D72FDCA5B9@tzi.org>
References: <5F695632-CF27-40FF-BC23-E731AAA95771@island-resort.com> <895A3DF8-DF11-479F-9DC6-9EF98465A7E0@tzi.org> <D8A304BA-897A-46D2-9B67-4FF458883478@island-resort.com> <1FC978C4-5EB5-42D9-B522-28D72FDCA5B9@tzi.org>
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: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 15:03:59 -0400
Message-ID: <23965.1597777439@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/SVoZTkMxYPxe8GU6p1T6Ojd5crk>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] Tagging requirement
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: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 19:04:07 -0000

Carsten, some year ago we had a lot of discussion when doing 7049bis about
what would be described in 7049bis, and what belonged in the Protocol using
document.

I think that many of Laurence's questions fall into this.
I wonder if we need either:

1) a guide to writing CBOR applicability statements.
2) a worked out example.

Probably both.
While a lot of the more normative advice all through 7049bis, it might be too
diffuse to apply quickly.

I think CDDL can be used to clarify things, but it might be that some of
us need the specific ways beat over our heads.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email