Re: [Cbor] 🔔 WGLC with request for reviews on cbor-file-magic-02

Christian Amsüss <> Wed, 20 October 2021 15:09 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA1C63A0603; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 08:09:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bnlOuFfjtBqI; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 08:09:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a01:4f8:190:3064::3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 143E63A0743; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 08:09:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A499401B7; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 17:09:18 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3060E106; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 17:09:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from (unknown [IPv6:2a02:b18:c13b:8010:5a9d:daee:cd20:89d6]) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C759E10A; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 17:09:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (nullmailer pid 592793 invoked by uid 1000); Wed, 20 Oct 2021 15:09:16 -0000
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 17:09:16 +0200
From: Christian =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ams=FCss?= <>
Cc: John Mattsson <>, "" <>
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="p/sim9TSVn0dPHfB"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] =?utf-8?q?=F0=9F=94=94_WGLC_with_request_for_reviews_on_c?= =?utf-8?q?bor-file-magic-02?=
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Concise Binary Object Representation \(CBOR\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 15:09:30 -0000

Hello file-magic authors,

(now with the right address, especially for group replies)

while the minor comments have been addressed in the updates, I think
that these two were neither answered nor resulted in changes (not that
they'd necessarily would, but a change might be just as good as an
answer), could you comment on them?

On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 10:02:37AM +0000, John Mattsson wrote:
> - "as is a file extension"
> The draft does not say anything about how to chose a file extension. I think the needs to say something and give guidance. Are protocols supposed to use some generic ".cbor" or use there own like ".c509". Is it recommended to use several tags with the same extension, i.e., should .c509 be used for several different tags (chain, bag, CSR, CRL,...) or should each tag use its own file extension. In the later case it would be good if the file extension was registered together with tag number in IANA.
> - I think it would help the reader to have an examples (CBOR diagnostic + CBOR encoding) already in Sections 3.1 and 3.2.
>   Something like the example in appendix B: "55800(1330664270(h'424F52'))"
>   Example CBOR protocol values and the resulting bytes in the file would be even better and would really help to make the draft easy to understand.


To use raw power is to make yourself infinitely vulnerable to greater powers.
  -- Bene Gesserit axiom