Re: [Cbor] Combination tags and CBOR Packed
Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Fri, 28 August 2020 22:39 UTC
Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 C8B823A0D65; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 15:39:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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 ma7-ZK66bl-r; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 15:39:45 -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 463BF3A0D5F; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 15:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.42.100] (p5089ae91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.174.145]) (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 4BdZKW1Q1CzyY5; Sat, 29 Aug 2020 00:39:43 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <015c01d67d8b$45aefb70$d10cf250$@augustcellars.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2020 00:39:42 +0200
Cc: draft-bormann-cbor-packed@ietf.org, cbor@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 620347182.685619-eaeb8b729a2ee32abcec2a6b36d4c9bb
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E6687019-64BF-4F8E-955B-AB6913DBAAA4@tzi.org>
References: <015c01d67d8b$45aefb70$d10cf250$@augustcellars.com>
To: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/p9Ale4NpTOGoTCcUvkpT_7M6_XY>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] Combination tags and CBOR Packed
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: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 22:39:48 -0000
On 2020-08-29, at 00:33, Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> wrote: > > Is it legal to stack up packing tags into a single item? Is > 6.229(6.232(simple(1)) legal and does it do what I would expect it to do. > Specifically it would concatenate three different value that are extracted > from the packing tables. Yes. (This has approximately the same complexity as an indefinite length string with three components.) (In diagnostic notation, you don’t write the “6.” — that is for CDDL “#6.”.... Apologies for this discontinuity.) Grüße, Carsten
- [Cbor] Combination tags and CBOR Packed Jim Schaad
- Re: [Cbor] Combination tags and CBOR Packed Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Cbor] Combination tags and CBOR Packed Jim Schaad