Re: [Cbor] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-cbor-network-addresses-09: (with COMMENT)

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 04 October 2021 18:50 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 CF4273A0B09; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 11:50:12 -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 DQ5hrlkomL4M; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 11:50:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79EF23A0B08; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 11:50:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E38318216; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 14:58:06 -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 FTseC1uV7P2X; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 14:57:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6A15181F1; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 14:57:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64BCF58B; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 14:49:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Murray Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com>
cc: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-cbor-network-addresses@ietf.org, barryleiba@computer.org, cbor-chairs@ietf.org, cbor@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <163336993121.17773.15035946091011379926@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <163336993121.17773.15035946091011379926@ietfa.amsl.com>
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: Mon, 04 Oct 2021 14:49:56 -0400
Message-ID: <22895.1633373396@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/cKKbqZU01MO9Cvv4_iy7m4s-E3Y>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-cbor-network-addresses-09: (with COMMENT)
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: Mon, 04 Oct 2021 18:50:13 -0000

Text changed as proposed.

Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
    > I concur with Lars' comment.

    > I'm not sure about the "WRONG" labels.  I suggest including that in prose
    > instead; for instance, something like the following:

    > OLD:

    > even though variations like:

    > 54([44, h'20010db81233'])  WRONG
    > 54([45, h'20010db8123f'])  WRONG

    > would be parsed in the exact same way.

    > NEW:

    > even though variations like:

    > 54([44, h'20010db81233'])
    > 54([45, h'20010db8123f'])

    > would be parsed in the exact same way; they MUST be
    > considered invalid.

https://github.com/cbor-wg/cbor-network-address/commit/f56bbfb69bee017269545a331c90f4931d63cfd1

diff --git a/cbor-network-addresses.mkd b/cbor-network-addresses.mkd
index 2d826cc..5936349 100644
--- a/cbor-network-addresses.mkd
+++ b/cbor-network-addresses.mkd
@@ -203,11 +203,11 @@ MUST be encoded as:
 even though variations like:

 ~~~~
-54([44, h'20010db81233'])  WRONG
-54([45, h'20010db8123f'])  WRONG
+54([44, h'20010db81233'])
+54([45, h'20010db8123f'])
 ~~~~

-would be parsed in the exact same way.
+would be parsed in the exact same way; they MUST be considered invalid.

 The same considerations apply to IPv4 prefixes.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide