From nobody Sun Apr 25 08:30:26 2021 Return-Path: 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 3E2813A1701; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 08:30:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.22 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, 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 2MfALRxTk84G; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 08:30:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C15163A16FF; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 08:30:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcb12.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.203.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4FSsR94zQfzySd; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 17:30:13 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2021 17:30:13 +0200 Cc: Michael Richardson , cbor@ietf.org, 6man@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 641057413.204631-678098a5db77b1125362e352a981a0f8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5989D772-0104-4F12-A43B-AFBC77266C9C@tzi.org> References: <12496.1619216560@localhost> To: Ole Troan X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Cbor] I-D Action: draft-ietf-cbor-network-addresses-04.txt X-BeenThere: cbor@ietf.org 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: Sun, 25 Apr 2021 15:30:20 -0000 > - for 261 I would at least include those arguments and make it clear = when to use or the other Sounds good to me. > - so you don=E2=80=99t want to support the commonly used shortcut of = specifying both and address and a prefix in one? That is a valid point. But I think the data should indicate whether they are just a prefix or = an address and a prefix. > - in ip agnostic code I often find I just need an IP address instead = of having to care if it=E2=80=99s 4 or 6. It would therefore be nice = with a general IP address and ip prefix type too.=20 If I understand this right, we already have that. One type with two = different tags=E2=80=A6 (CBOR doesn=E2=80=99t have =E2=80=9Ctypes=E2=80=9D [except for the = =E2=80=9Cmajor types=E2=80=9D on the representation level]. You are = free to construct your own types in your implementation, e.g. construct = a =E2=80=9CBoolean=E2=80=9D type from =E2=80=9Ctrue=E2=80=9D and = =E2=80=9Cfalse=E2=80=9D. In your case, the =E2=80=9CIP address and = prefix=E2=80=9D type would include values with either tag 52 or 54. We = could define recommended CDDL types, like we did in Section 5 of RFC = 8746...) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten